GURPS Dungeon Fantasy Denizens: Barbarians

[Kuroshima]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Sure it is. Backward compatibility is a thing. This supplement doesn't replace all prior art on barbarians; it complements it. We can't have two different baselines floating around out there. What we can do is offer optional alternatives, which this supplement does in spades!

The price of excessive backward compatibility is legacy code. It's always a balancing act to manage it and the need for more modern stuff. All in all, I feel that it was nicely handled here.

[Peaches]

It would be nice if one day there was a GURPS Dungeon Fantasy Compendium, compiling all the material from the DF supplements and Pyramid articles, revised to all work together seamlessly with new tasteful professional artwork.

[chandley]

Anything that spells out how to build a naked (Shirtless Savage), ST 30 (for a few minutes, Great Rage), 46 HP (mountain of muscle) Pixie (Short Barbarian, but keep the Gigantism for SM -5!) that sports DR 7-9, takes half damage if hit (Naked Rage), clobbering you with a club 3x as big as they are (Giant Weapons 4) and then hockey checking you at full speed (ramming speed) is a must buy.

Suffice to say, I recommend to anyone planning on a barbarian character. Hilarity is sure to ensue. Which is to say, there are more sensible, but still awesome, builds in here too :)

[Wavefunction]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Sure it is. Backward compatibility is a thing. This supplement doesn't replace all prior art on barbarians; it complements it. We can't have two different baselines floating around out there. What we can do is offer optional alternatives, which this supplement does in spades!

What I mean is that while you certainly shouldn't rip survival skills out of the basic barbarian, there should have been at least one option completely without them. Perhaps something else instead in place, but some kind of option. That's just my opinion of course.

It occurs to me that the refined barbarian could (and possibly should) have swapped out Outdoorsman for something more fitting to a city-dweller.

I dunno, it just seems like you've set out to create some options for barbarians who aren't as outdoors-focused, and failed to take it to it's logical conclusion. I can see your argument though.

[Bruno]

I've spent the day recreating a character I've played off and on, through three and a half game systems, on the order of two decades now (how time flies when you're having fun!)

Mrugnak is the fellow that earned me the "Minotaur barbarian" reputation. As he was originally a D&D Barbarian, he fits very nicely as a Rage barbarian (rage powers!)

Mrugnak started his career at level 10, but I decided to shoehorn him into 250 points. He only started at level 10 because of Reasons, he doesn't really need to be some sort of super-advanced character.

Since you can't buy Minotaur out of the discretionary 25 points on the Rage template (and I'm not about to sacrifice my Rage powers, defeats the point), I went with the option that a young Mrugnak sort of coasted in human Barbarian school due to native Minotaur talent (ie, setting attributes to the template level after applying racial modifiers). There's so much overlap between Minotaur and Rage barbarian that this resulted in a sub-250 point character (this happens with regular Barbarians too, if you go this route). I bought power-ups until he was back up to 250 points.

Notably, I also bought a "non standard lens" to make him more like the D&D 3e minotaurs - 4 points for Hooves and the Fur perk (and the zero point feature, ordinary cow tail). Can't wear ordinary footwear or pants, as a result; I'm aiming for Naked Rage as his next major upgrade, so being restricted in Kewl Armor Lewts isn't as big a deal.
Also he's got stonking great piles of natural DR (not yet maxed out!) due to being a Shirtless Savage and a Minotaur, so fie on your equipment. I DID buy him a studded leather skirt for modesty purposes.

EDIT: Erp, meant to put the link in there.

[OldSam]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Anyway, we're keeping counsel with our established writers and aiming at core professions for now. To reiterate what I said above, though, there's no master plan for this or for any part of GURPS. Once one or two more Denizens items are released, we'll add the sub-series to the wish list and see what happens.

I'd wish we see some "bundled" Dungeon Fantasy Volumes in the future, integrating the available material as single books. Hopefully available as Soft- or Hardcover but compiled as single PDF's to print out your own DF "books" would be also great.

[Gold & Appel Inc]

I play the Barbarian in CousinX's awesome but on-hiatus high-power DF game.

On the subject of the Outdoorsman Talent, you really need to take into consideration that you're getting a bonus to every single Survival specialty, and there are quite a few of them in most settings. No matter where the GM sends us (and he throws a diverse array of environmental hazards at us, because I spent a lot of points on dealing with that and that's what good GMs do), I'm the point man when it comes to dealing with the local climate, flora, and fauna, which are usually quite hazardous. Sure most outdoor skills are Per-based, and Per costs half as much as Outdoorsman, but in this game, I started off with both maxed out at +4 for a total of +8 on all of that stuff. Also, you get the learning time reduction and reaction bonus.

Plus I'm the HULK SMASH guy in the party, and the GM let Barbarians only buy Bulletproof Nudity. It's a pretty fun gig if you do it right, overall.

ETA RE: Leprechaun Barbarians: I just let the one in my all-leprechaun campaign (a colossus among leprechauns at a towering 3' tall, who goes by, "Curlagh O'Hurlagh"), buy enough levels of the Huge Weapons perk to let him use an SM 0 maul. It's a lot easier and funnier that way.

[thulben]

Originally Posted by ErhnamDJ

DF has its own set of assumptions, though. Sure you're able to deviate from them, but I don't think that's fitting with the spirit of the series.

You're right; it does have its own set of assumptions. And I think the underlying theme is that each class is good at some thing (or things) that the other classes aren't. And, as I said in my original post, if you take away Outdoorsman, you take away the thing that the Barbarian is good at that other classes aren't (namely, outdoorsy stuff) and so should replace it with something. So if you step back and then ask "if I take away Outdoorsman, what is the Barbarian's niche?" and have a good answer, you're good to go.

But maybe in your game Barbarians are just melee fighters with a weird culture (but not necessarily good at hunting and whatnot). It's probably not going to break anything to make them just that. Don't let anyone tell you that the fun you're having is the wrong kind of fun.

[ErhnamDJ]

Originally Posted by thulben

So if you step back and then ask "if I take away Outdoorsman, what is the Barbarian's niche?" and have a good answer, you're good to go.

The difference, in my mind, is that the barbarian is strong but the knight is skilled. The barbarian might have ST 20, but the knight has skill 25 with both his sword and shield.

If they were thought of in this way, they would about even out. I'm not suggesting that the barbarian shouldn't have wilderness abilities, but I think they would be more appropriate if they were treated similarly to the knight's military skills: something he starts with some competence in, with the option of raising them with a Talent from his advantages, rather than having a mandatory large number of his points spent on them.

I'm sure this is easier for players to see after years of using these rules than it was to predict exactly how the templates would play out when they were being written. I've played barbarians and had fun doing so; I just feel like the template could make better use of its points.