Signup
Welcome to... Canonfire! World of GreyhawK
Features
Postcards from the Flanaess
Adventures
in Greyhawk
Cities of
Oerth
Deadly
Denizens
Jason Zavoda Presents
The Gord Novels
Greyhawk Wiki
#greytalk
JOIN THE CHAT
ON DISCORD
    Canonfire :: View topic - Barbarians: kit vs. Complete Book of-
    Canonfire Forum Index -> Greyhawk- AD&D 2nd Edition
    Barbarians: kit vs. Complete Book of-
    Author Message
    GreySage

    Joined: Sep 09, 2009
    Posts: 2470
    From: SW WA state (Highvale)

    Send private message
    Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:33 am  
    Barbarians: kit vs. Complete Book of-

    This thread is a spin-off from one about Kord and his clergy:

    http://www.canonfire.com/cf/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=5631

    I just want to make sure I have clarified the difference between the 'types' of barbarians, stereotypes or otherwise.

    From what I recall, the origin of the word, 'barbarian,' comes from the Romans who viewed any non-Roman as uncivilized, and thus, a barbarian. Maybe our resident historian, SirXaris, can verify or refute that statement.

    When most folks think of barbarians, the stereotypical Viking comes to mind: huge, hairy, savage, muscular, chain mailed and toting a shield, horns sprouting from a helm (in truth, the Norsemen did NOT have horned helms!), and brandishing a sword, hammer, and/or battle axe.

    However, many, many other "types" of barbarian cultures exist...

    Unearthed Arcana offered the traditional type of barbarian (complete with picture!) in its pages. Then, along came The Complete Book of Fighters which offered a Barbarian kit (as well as a Savage, which, in my mind, was a more primitive version of the barbarian). All the 'souped up' abilities of the Barbarian from Unearthed Arcana were stripped away (not making a judgment, just an observation). Years down the road, out came The Complete Book of Barbarians which 'resurrected' the Unearthed Arcana variant once more, but added various kits to the mix.

    However, in reading the first few introductory pages of the 'new' book, as well as the descriptions of the various barbarian kits, I am led to believe that The Complete Book of Barbarians does NOT apply to a Viking-style culture and setting. Nor would it to any 'sophisticated' metal-working type of barbarian (Goths, Huns, Celts, etc.). For that, one must fall back into the Barbarian kit offered by The Complete Book of Fighters.

    Yes, I know that DMs can make alterations, and I am obviously not adverse to such, but merely wanted to make sure that my observations on this matter are correct...

    -Lanthorn


    Last edited by Lanthorn on Wed Jun 26, 2013 2:23 pm; edited 1 time in total
    GreySage

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010
    Posts: 2695
    From: LG Dyvers

    Send private message
    Wed Jun 26, 2013 11:30 am  
    Re: Barbarians: kit vs. Complete Book of-

    Lanthorn wrote:
    From what I recall, the origin of the word, 'barbarian,' comes from the Romans who viewed any non-Roman as uncivilized, and thus, a barbarian. Maybe our resident historian, SirXaris, can verify or refute that statement.


    You are correct, Lanthorn, that the Romans used it (the Latin form, 'barbarus') to refer to any outsiders as 'uncivilized'. They, however, borrowed it from the Greek 'barbaros' which meant 'foreign' or 'ignorant'.

    Lanthorn wrote:
    When most folks think of barbarians, the stereotypical Viking comes to mind: huge, hairy, savage, muscular, chain mailed and toting a shield, horns sprouting from a helm (in truth, the Norsemen did NOT have horned helms!), and brandishing a sword, hammer, and/or battle axe.


    Protrusions, such as horns or wings, on helmets would be counter-productive to a serious warrior. They would unbalance the wearer's head, help the wearer's opponent score a solid hit on the helmet-wearer's head as the horns/wings help snag the weapon instead of allowing it to glance off (mostly) harmlessly, would snag on things as the warrior tries to move through brush or the interior of a building, and would offer a dangerous handhold to an enemy grappler. The only positive to wearing such an accoutrement would be its intimidation factor.

    Thus, such additions were likely only used on ceremonial helmets by thengs (chieftains) and priests.

    Here's a link with a good bit if information on the issue:
    http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2189/did-vikings-really-wear-horns-on-their-helmets

    I'm sorry that I have no familiarity with the books you are asking about, Lanthorn.

    SirXaris
    _________________
    SirXaris' Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/SirXaris?ref=hl
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:23 am  

    I agree that the Complete Book of Barbarians was rather incomplete, it being almost solely about "primitive savages", and really not having much of anything to do with what i think most people see as the classic fantasy barbarian at all (i.e. Conan, Fafhrd, etc.).





    ..and something a bit more over-the-top:



    Happy

    What you see instead is info on "primitive savages", meaning those who wield wood, stone, and bone...more like this:


    Yep. Rome was sacked by cavemen. Laughing

    The Complete Book of Barbarians is not among my favorite books in that series for what it is supposed to cover.

    Now, if you want a book for "savage tribesmen" and such, it has much to offer. For example, if I was running a 2E campaign and planned to take my players through WG6 Isle of the Ape, I might very well tap that book for ideas about the island's tribes, or I might use its ideas for any people I would want to make very primitive (technology-wise that is), such as some Olman or Touv tribes, because I like the idea of a people living out in the midst of nature and using only things that can easily be acquired from nature to mess people up with. Evil Grin I might apply some of those same concepts to Grugach tribes too. So, the book isn't a total loss, but there is not much in there for what I think of as classic barbarians.

    For a more classic fantasy barbarian, I would recommend running a Fighter or Ranger and giving them the Barbarian, Beast Rider, or Berserker kit from The Complete Fighter's Handbook.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    GreySage

    Joined: Sep 09, 2009
    Posts: 2470
    From: SW WA state (Highvale)

    Send private message
    Thu Jun 27, 2013 6:45 am  

    OK, good to know that I wasn't misinterpreting the information.

    Next question. Do you allow your Viking, Celtic, etc. style barbarians any of the 'special powers' from the original Unearthed Arcana or Complete Barbarians Handbook, such as increased movement, leaping/running abilities, and the like? Or do you keep that only to the more primitive types of barbarians?

    Although the Complete Book of Barbarians is by no means my least favorite guide (I reserve that for the Complete Priest's Handbook), I agree with you, Ceb, that it only shares a small and rather incomplete sampling from this iconic character 'class.'

    What are your thoughts about 'marrying' the two, that being taking some of the benefits and hindrances (such as increased XP table, which I don't mind) from the barbarians from 'their' source guide and merging it with the Barbarian, Beast-rider, or Berserker kits from the Complete Fighter's Handbook? Basically, you are using the barbarian as a template and overlaying the fighter kits on it. Or, another way to look at it is that you are adding the fighter kits into the mix offered by the (incomplete) barbarian handbook.

    -Lanthorn
    GreySage

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010
    Posts: 2695
    From: LG Dyvers

    Send private message
    Thu Jun 27, 2013 7:52 am  

    Nice pictures, Cebrion.

    That barbarian in the Diablo picture certainly looks intimidating, but with all those protrusions on his armor, a mob of kobolds would have no trouble tackling him. Shocked

    A horned codpiece, even! Razz

    SirXaris
    _________________
    SirXaris' Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/SirXaris?ref=hl
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Thu Jun 27, 2013 11:49 pm  

    Lanthorn wrote:
    OK, good to know that I wasn't misinterpreting the information.

    Next question. Do you allow your Viking, Celtic, etc. style barbarians any of the 'special powers' from the original Unearthed Arcana or Complete Barbarians Handbook, such as increased movement, leaping/running abilities, and the like? Or do you keep that only to the more primitive types of barbarians?

    No, I just stuck with what was in the kits, as most kits give benefits without much of a real downside. Because of that, I encouraged most players to take kits for their characters (i.e. every character then has some extra benefits, and nobody feels shorted-changed).

    Lanthorn wrote:
    What are your thoughts about 'marrying' the two, that being taking some of the benefits and hindrances (such as increased XP table, which I don't mind) from the barbarians from 'their' source guide and merging it with the Barbarian, Beast-rider, or Berserker kits from the Complete Fighter's Handbook? Basically, you are using the barbarian as a template and overlaying the fighter kits on it. Or, another way to look at it is that you are adding the fighter kits into the mix offered by the (incomplete) barbarian handbook.

    The kits are templates overlayed upon the base classes, not the other way around. A combination of things would be fine, but, as you say, one must even out the benefits with either some revery real in-game hindrances, or bump up the required XP.

    Or you could just take the Unearthed Arcana Barbarian class and port it straight over to 2E, which only requires, what, making sure the weapon/non-weapon proficiency slots work out properly? If you want a somewhat toned down barbarian, or one that is not hugely in favor of light to no armor (Conan wore everything from a loincloth to the armor of a mounted knight, and everything in between), then stick with the barbarian as a kit modification to the warrior classes, as 2E normally handles it.

    Or, better still in my opinion, do what the 2E writers should have done and write up a 2E version of the base Barbarian class exactly as you want it to be, as that is not very difficult either when you strip away the flowery language and break it down to its bare bones mechanics. You will need your level chart, a weapon/non-weapon proficiency chart, and a skills chart (if you want barbarians to use some of the Thief-like skills, like Climb Walls and such) at most. Then you need your class benefits (run fast, etc.) and limitations (distrust of magic, illiteracy, etc.). The only reason I never did this is because nobody played a barbarian in my campaign in its 2E era. If you want to work out a 2E Barbarian base class, I'll be happy to provide feedback and ideas.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -


    Last edited by Cebrion on Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:42 pm; edited 1 time in total
    GreySage

    Joined: Sep 09, 2009
    Posts: 2470
    From: SW WA state (Highvale)

    Send private message
    Fri Jun 28, 2013 7:46 am  

    Ceb, good ideas. I look at the barbarian 'subclass' akin to what a paladin and ranger are to the fighter. Rangers and paladins have certain ability stat prereqs, their own abilities and benefits, their own XP pt table, and some hindrances. Same, now, with the barbarian.

    If I decide to retrofit the Barbarian subclass into the Options system, which I use to create characters, I think I can get a basic idea how many CPs those abilities are worth by cross-referencing those from other classes (esp. the ranger and perhaps thief).

    Much thanks for all the input, and I am open to more, if anyone has something to add.

    -Lanthorn
    Display posts from previous:   
       Canonfire Forum Index -> Greyhawk- AD&D 2nd Edition All times are GMT - 8 Hours
    Page 1 of 1

    Jump to:  

    You cannot post new topics in this forum
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum
    You cannot vote in polls in this forum




    Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises

    Contact the Webmaster.  Long Live Spidasa!


    Greyhawk Gothic Font by Darlene Pekul is used under the Creative Commons License.

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.
    Page Generation: 0.33 Seconds