|
|
|
apprentice
|
OP
apprentice
Joined: Aug 2023
|
Why they're a class. (I'm not objecting to them being a class per-say - this isn't a "complaint" thread by any means.. more of a curiosity thing)
Why are Barbarians a class in DnD and not say a background or sub-race?
(This is specifically a DnD question before someone tells me they're a class in BG3 because "they're a class in DnD")
Traditionally to be a Barbarian you would need to be born into a tribe/group of people that would be considered uncivilised. Usually associated with an area, e.g. "the barbarians from the plains". To be a noble that's born and grew up in Baldurs Gate who is also a Barbarian makes no sense in this context (yet it does for all the other classes in the game).
So I'm confused, why are they a class?
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Aug 2023
|
Well etymologically you are correct; Barbarian was just an Ancient Greek insult for anyone who wasn't Greek (making fun of their language, 'bar bar'). I think when people hear Barbarian today they imagine like a Conan type; big sword, muscles, wearing nothing but underwear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Nov 2020
|
Traditionally to be a Barbarian you would need to be born into a tribe/group of people that would be considered uncivilised. Usually associated with an area, e.g. "the barbarians from the plains". To be a noble that's born and grew up in Baldurs Gate who is also a Barbarian makes no sense in this context (yet it does for all the other classes in the game).
So I'm confused, why are they a class? Because, typically, Barbarians *are* born into communities that would be considered uncivilised. The most famous Barbarians in the Forgotten Realms are from the Uthgardt tribes. They are also commonly found in the tribal, or near-tribal communities in Chult, Rasheman, and the Chondalwood. This can all be seen in lore-text that accompanies the class in the books, but isn't really echoed in the in-game text. EDIT: Here's the lore text from the actual book. There's a lot of it.
A tall human tribesman strides through a blizzard, draped in fur and hefting his axe. He laughs as he charges toward the frost giant who dared poach his people's elk herd.
A half-orc snarls at the latest challenger to her authority over their savage tribe, ready to break his neck with her bare hands as she did to the last six rivals.
Frothing at the mouth, a dwarf slams his helmet into the face of his drow foe, then turns to drive his armored elbow into the gut of another.
These barbarians, different as they might be, are defined by their rage: unbridled, unquenchable, and unthinking fury. More than a mere emotion, their anger is the ferocity of a cornered predator, the unrelenting assault of a storm, the churning turmoil of the sea.
For some, their rage springs from a communion with fierce animal spirits. Others draw from a roiling reservoir of anger at a world full of pain. For every barbarian, rage is a power that fuels not just a battle frenzy but also uncanny reflexes, resilience, and feats of strength.
Primal Instinct
People of towns and cities take pride in how their civilized ways set them apart from animals, as if denying one's own nature was a mark of superiority. To a barbarian, though, civilization is no virtue, but a sign of weakness. The strong embrace their animal nature—keen instincts, primal physicality, and ferocious rage. Barbarians are uncomfortable when hedged in by walls and crowds. They thrive in the wilds of their homelands: the tundra, jungle, or grasslands where their tribes live and hunt.
Barbarians come alive in the chaos of combat. They can enter a berserk state where rage takes over, giving them superhuman strength and resilience. A barbarian can draw on this reservoir of fury only a few times without resting, but those few rages are usually sufficient to defeat whatever threats arise.
A Life of Danger
Not every member of the tribes deemed "barbarians" by scions of civilized society has the barbarian class. A true barbarian among these people is as uncommon as a skilled fighter in a town, and he or she plays a similar role as a protector of the people and a leader in times of war. Life in the wild places of the world is fraught with peril: rival tribes, deadly weather, and terrifying monsters. Barbarians charge headlong into that danger so that their people don't have to.
Their courage in the face of danger makes barbarians perfectly suited for adventuring. Wandering is often a way of life for their native tribes, and the rootless life of the adventurer is little hardship for a barbarian. Some barbarians miss the close-knit family structures of the tribe, but eventually find them replaced by the bonds formed among the members of their adventuring parties.
Creating a Barbarian
When creating a barbarian character, think about where your character comes from and his or her place in the world. Talk with your DM about an appropriate origin for your barbarian. Did you come from a distant land, making you a stranger in the area of the campaign? Or is the campaign set in a rough-and-tumble frontier where barbarians are common?
What led you to take up the adventuring life? Were you lured to settled lands by the promise of riches? Did you join forces with soldiers of those lands to face a shared threat? Did monsters or an invading horde drive you out of your homeland, making you a rootless refugee? Perhaps you were a prisoner of war, brought in chains to "civilized" lands and only now able to win your freedom. Or you might have been cast out from your people because of a crime you committed, a taboo you violated, or a coup that removed you from a position of authority.
Last edited by Piff; 03/10/23 02:49 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Why are Barbarians a class in DnD and not say a background or sub-race? D&D history. Gygax first proposed them as a sub-class of fighters in Dragon Magazine back in the days of AD&D, and they became "official" with the release of Unearthed Arcana. Here's a link to the original article if you're interested (scroll down to page 10). From a quick read-through, it appears they were basically spell-less Rangers with thief-like abilities to hide and climb in natural environments, with no trace of any "rage" mechanic. And, yes, Gygax originally intended them to come from uncivilized tribal cultures. The whole Rage thing always seemed weird to me. It's as if the D&D hivemind somehow transitioned from Conan as the model barbarian (sly, cunning, yet strong and quick) to Cú Chulainn, or maybe modern portrayals of Old Norse Berserkers (insane fighters utterly heedless of danger).
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
|
To add on to what others have mentioned, I'd also like to put forward that for our various martial and martial-adjacent classes, the core thing that really differentiates them, immutably, is the manner in which they are effective; A Monk, a Fighter and a Barbarian are all, at their very base, people who make their adventuring life by hitting things, usually with weapons, sometimes without, but effectively enough to make them stop being a problem.
They're different classes not because of their individual backgrounds, which can vary, but because of the manner in which they approach the task of "hit the problem until it stops being a problem". Monks, for example, take a spiritual bent, and make themselves most effective by supplementing their physical capabilities with a certain understanding and control over energy flows, both as they affect the monk, and their targets. Not all monks are acetics, of course, but this is the core element of how they operate that makes them distinct from others.
A fighter may scoff at all that wishy-washy, spiritual, energy flow, dragon pulse, balance in all things, mumbo-jumbo... though they cannot claim it isn't effective... nevertheless, for a fighter, despite how extremely broad and wide-reaching the elements of the class are, the core of their effectiveness lies in skill and training; no matter the path a fighter takes, what defines them is that they are the effective users of tools, and it is through their skill and training with those tools that they are effective.
A Barbarian may be spiritual, and they may use tools, but the element of a barbarian that defines them is a focus on body and the primal self; they are a living weapon and a living shield, and it is this raw physicality of self is what they use to be effective. Barbarians also come in a variety of different flavours - as many as there are players to play them, even - and even the manner in which their rage manifests, and what it means to them will be different from one barbarian to another. At the very base of it though, it is the focus on physicality of self, and the means of pushing that towards super-human levels that makes them what they are.
So, you could have a Barbarian who was born and raised in a city, but who has always felt drawn to pushing their physical self to excellence, far beyond anything that their city life would make necessary; when it reaches a point that they perhaps grow frustrated at the limits civilised life and civilised settings puts upon them, and that well of limit-exceeding power they can draw on when they're truly in 'the zone' can't really be safely contained by any inner-city training hall... that's probably a good sign that that gym-junkie jock might well be tapping in to what means to be a barbarian.
Worth mentioning also... BG3 has a portion of the fault here, since it forcefully assigns you the Baldurian background tag, and you have absolutely zero say in this and no capability of choosing otherwise, or even suggesting that you might not be from that city. It really shouldn't do that.
Last edited by Niara; 03/10/23 03:48 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Aug 2014
|
Worth mentioning also... BG3 has a portion of the fault here, since it forcefully assigns you the Baldurian background tag, and you have absolutely zero say in this and no capability of choosing otherwise, or even suggesting that you might not be from that city. It really shouldn't do that. Indeed. I found it very hard to take my barbarianism serious when the game offered to let me recount memories from my upbringing in the city. Instead, I would have appreciated special dialogue options in which articles and words in excess of two syllables are omitted. I would like to be able to roleplay a barbarian who spits on civilisation and big city politics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Probably because Half-Orc Barbarians are as common as Human Fighters,
Personally Baldurian Tag just wouldn't work for my Half-Orc Outlander Barbarian of Gruumsh (1 lvl of War Cleric), I'm saving this playthrough for later, (He's only hanging on the Beach with Shadowheart, Lae'Zel and the Everburn Blade) until I beat BG3 on my Main.
Last edited by Sai the Elf; 03/10/23 05:20 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Aug 2023
|
Actually "primitive" people in reallife are anything but not civilized. They often have very high moral standards, very interesting religion and lore, etc.
For good reason "barbarians" who get a taste of "civilization" prefer to return to their "barbarism" instead.
Just an example, primitive people spent like 20 hours per week doing "work". Which means doing things like hunting, fishing, collecting fruits. In many regards the things we "civilized" people do during holidays.
D&D Barbarians are inspired by various sources, both historical and ficitional. In effect they are simply a different approach to the pure, magic-less warrior, than Fighters.
Thus D&D Barbarians can exist in any context. No need for a tribal origin of the character. And Tribes can just as well produce Fighters, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Because in 1982, this happened... hehe Then like everyone is going to want to play as whatever that is right, complete with the wheel of pain and the riddle of steel! hehe Primal rage with totemic animals feels pretty cool for a theme. They seem a little more interesting mechanically than the version we got in BG2 that way. I think Eagle is a lot of fun in BG3! ps. sorry I always forget how jumbo those embedded videos go here on the desktop display. As an aside, when the Barbarians were introduced, background didn't have many mechanics really that I can remember. It was sort of all split down the middle into fantasy Race or Class, so of the two Class probably made more sense I guess. Conan the Barbarian/Fighter/Rogue/whatever was needed pretty much hehe. But now Background does exist and it has some mechanical applications, so it wouldn't surprise to see them revisit this stuff in what will hopefully be called 6th Edition Dungeons & Dragons, someday. I did hear rumblings about removing Shaman and Druid and sidestepping a few others like Witch (mostly in the sourcebooks I'd guess to avoid RL connotations on some stuff) but then not sure how that winds it's way down into the various campaign settings. Druid would be a hard one to ditch now I think. Barbarian seems similarly enshrined in the popular consciousness, based more on like movies and graphic novels, than whatever their historical sources might have been before the Dungeon Dragons got their claws on em hehe.
Last edited by Black_Elk; 04/10/23 10:24 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Nov 2020
|
Many Barbarians in DnD also have ties to various forms of spirituality, while they themselves don't use magic, they do channel primal sources of energy in their altered state, not unlike a Shaman trying to channel energy or spirits while in their altered state. This can be seen in some of their subclass options, we have animal spirit totems to empower you, ancestor spirit summoning, channeling the energy of storms, and literally transforming to take on the aspects of a predator to aid you in battle. Then you have Zealot, and that's an entire thing all on it's own and I have many question about the motivations of deity that sponsors a Barbarian instead of a Paladin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Sep 2023
|
Along with Conan the barbarian see also Slaine and his warp spasms, which first came out in 1983 in 2000ad, I certainly remember running with this sort of thing/flavour in the 80's ![[Linked Image from 2.bp.blogspot.com]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8idWxCR0NF0/UFJWVQWj8PI/AAAAAAAAFbM/PKRfiaya0AY/s1600/1608.jpg) Which lent into the whole Celtic thing, and coming from the UK it was great and much loved
Last edited by unjulation; 04/10/23 01:51 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Sep 2023
|
Oh and I forgot about this dude from the white dwarf mags ![[Linked Image from geeksofdoom.com]](https://geeksofdoom.com/GoD/img/2013/01/2013-01-09-thrud_the_barbarian.jpg) And of course the first two discworld books, the 80's were full of barbarians
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Why are Barbarians a class in DnD and not say a background or sub-race? D&D history. Gygax first proposed them as a sub-class of fighters in Dragon Magazine back in the days of AD&D, and they became "official" with the release of Unearthed Arcana. Here's a link to the original article if you're interested (scroll down to page 10). From a quick read-through, it appears they were basically spell-less Rangers with thief-like abilities to hide and climb in natural environments, with no trace of any "rage" mechanic. And, yes, Gygax originally intended them to come from uncivilized tribal cultures. The whole Rage thing always seemed weird to me. It's as if the D&D hivemind somehow transitioned from Conan as the model barbarian (sly, cunning, yet strong and quick) to Cú Chulainn, or maybe modern portrayals of Old Norse Berserkers (insane fighters utterly heedless of danger). Agreed. Robert Howard Conan was a rogue/fighter multiclass, and he did not dump his int stat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Oct 2023
|
Why they're a class. (I'm not objecting to them being a class per-say - this isn't a "complaint" thread by any means.. more of a curiosity thing)
Why are Barbarians a class in DnD and not say a background or sub-race?
(This is specifically a DnD question before someone tells me they're a class in BG3 because "they're a class in DnD")
Traditionally to be a Barbarian you would need to be born into a tribe/group of people that would be considered uncivilised. Usually associated with an area, e.g. "the barbarians from the plains". To be a noble that's born and grew up in Baldurs Gate who is also a Barbarian makes no sense in this context (yet it does for all the other classes in the game).
So I'm confused, why are they a class? They are a supplement class in 1e AD&D, mercifully dropped in 2e and then returned as a core class in 3e. And even though I thought they were lame and unnecessary in 1e (just like the Cavalier and the Thief-Acrobat which fortunately never saw the light of day again except maybe as some optional kit or prestige class or whatever) at least it was very clear who these "Barbarians" were. They are Viking Berserkers. Why they were not called Berserkers is beyond me. And the implication that every single tribal person is some kind of giant hairy person with a giant axe is weird. Clearly this is a very specific archetype referencing a very specific culture. And even if you were running a Viking-inspired campaign of D&D not EVERY warrior is a Berserker. And were Vikings even really tribal people? They had kings and all. But to me they have seemed to grow just more confusing and incoherent as a class moving forward. Now they have all these shamanistic powers and implying they are closer to nature as if Rangers and Druids were insufficient for nature based classes. And that doesn't really fit with the whole Viking Berserker thing. So I don't even know what the heck they are. They are a confusing mash of various ideas about tribal societies that I don't find very compelling. Sure the Berserkers wore bear skins and were supposed to turn into bears in battle but I have a hard time imagining a Berserker putting on an Elk skin and channeling the rage of a herbivore. But the idea is that this person is a warrior from a tribal, not city-having, society and growing up in that culture has given them these powers. That is the idea. So why Karlach, who grew up in a city and then went to hell, would have access to the cultural knowledge necessary to have this fighting style or shamanistic powers I have no idea. Has she ever seen a bear before this adventure? Why is she able to channel the spirit of bears? I don't know. I think Larian really failed making a Barbarian character with Karlach. There is zero reason or justification for it, Karlach never expresses any interest in animals or Shamanistic beliefs. She just gets the powers anyway. Which is weird since the class of the other Origin characters is really well defined and well done. If you play in my game and you want to be a Barbarian, I will make it work and we will make you as cool as possible. But otherwise I just sort of try to forget they exist. I think they are both lame and incoherent background wise and lacking mechanically.
Last edited by Valmy77; 04/10/23 09:08 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
As an archetype Barbarians are amusing, because everything about them (even the Conan flicks) are basically a rehash on the Labors of Hercules. That's where the wearing of the skins and the animal stuff comes from for that iconography. So Herakles has to deal with the Hind, the Lion, the Boar, the Bull, the Birds, the Hydra, the Mare, the 3 headed hound, Hippolyta's girdle etc. and a bunch of plants for that apple to appease Hera. It's coming staight out of the Greek there, via Roman proxy, which makes the choice of the word "Barbarian" a bit of an inside joke right? For the berzerk visualization that's mostly on Frazetta and Kaluta and Jones, or was for me. It's a nice mashup though heheh Ps. For this one I think it's better not to dig too terribly deep, because if we seek a source in the Greek that's just another mashup construct too. Since it was a later invention anyway, for a catch-all. Ancient Greeks didn't call themselves Greeks, they were Hellenes (or any of the random catalog riffs like we get in Homer... Argives and such.) So the previously civilized civilization becomes the outsiders' outskirt when the script gets flipped. Even a first gen Argonaut like Herakles was an import initially. Bacchus did the same thing right, with those lion skins, just like Richard Burton at the end of Cleopatra? Almost bringing down the studio and whole house of cards there. But not quite! Cause we get new cards, like the Frazetta ones! "Hercules Barbarian" could probably be a sub-class of the Barbarian cross-class Warrior/Rogue archetype. Keep the big ball of chaos and confusion rolling along! I don't think anyone's stopping it now hehe ![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/9wStS85/frank-frazetta-yellowcards-knaveofcups.png)
Last edited by Black_Elk; 05/10/23 12:38 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: May 2023
|
@Valmy77 - full agreement about Karlach. I muliclass Origins, leaving them with at least one level in their "character defining" class. But I respec Karlach into Fighter.
There are some dumb - or dubious choices - as to classes in DnD. Should be cut down to 5-6, IMO, with Barbarian being one of the first to get the axe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Also, it's kinda like this right... I mean right? heheh I say let em keep it somewhere, maybe in the background? Karlach is fun! Barbarians break dance and break barrels now for sure, no denying it. I could imagine many sub variants - Conan Barbarians, Hercules Barbarians, Ragnar Barbarians, Xena Barbarians, Valeria Barbarians, Weird Al Barbarians (UHF sub-class "Unleashed!") Whatever works lol Just stick it in the side folio I guess, but Eagle is like full on Valkyrie in an arcade game! Lives forever probably heheh
Last edited by Black_Elk; 05/10/23 01:41 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Also, it's kinda like this right... I mean right? heheh I say let em keep it somewhere, maybe in the background? Karlach is fun! Barbarians break dance and break barrels now for sure, no denying it. I could imagine many sub variants - Conan Barbarians, Hercules Barbarians, Ragnar Barbarians, Xena Barbarians, Valeria Barbarians, Weird Al Barbarians (UHF sub-class "Unleashed!") Whatever works lol Just stick it in the side folio I guess, but Eagle is like full on Valkyrie in an arcade game! Lives forever probably heheh [url=https://ibb.co/6NNY0hP] ![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/kMMK2n8/cfilmhistoria-sandahlbergman1982.jpg) [/url Would He-Man count as a Barbarian?
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Aug 2014
|
I think Larian really failed making a Barbarian character with Karlach. Truth. Growing up in the city rules out being a barbarian. Her character does need rage, but it would have been better if they made the beserker a subclass of fighter (and possibly barbarian too). Some unique characteristics for barbarians that I can think of, that would make sense: 1. Support from their local god(s)/spirit(s) 2. Mastery of primitive weapons (bow, spear) 3. Intimidation bonus 4. Better at interpreting foreign languages (reading foreign scripts, eavesdropping on foreign agents) 5. Better at nature related things (plants, animals, weather) 6. Acrobatics bonus (climbed a lot of trees and jumped from rocks a lot in their youth)
Last edited by Ikke; 05/10/23 08:04 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
