GURPS Dungeon Fantasy Denizens: Barbarians

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by Bruno

They're more of a power fantasy for decadent urbanists with exceedingly poor physical condition. *waves*

Not necessarily incompatible.

[Tyneras]

Originally Posted by RyanW

Am I the only one that, when hearing "barbarian warrior", immediately thinks of light cavalry over a big guy with an axe? Foederatus, rather than Viking.

Context driven, for me. On an RPG site like this with Dungeon Fantasy in the title, "barbarian warrior" means "Conan the Barbarian" to me.

In real life, or just a more realistic setting, "barbarian" just means outsider in a vaguely insulting manner, so a Roman Legionnaire would be a barbarian warrior to the Chinese.

Crom! RAWRRGG!

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by Tyneras

Context driven, for me. On an RPG site like this with Dungeon Fantasy in the title, "barbarian warrior" means "Conan the Barbarian" to me.

In real life, or just a more realistic setting, "barbarian" just means outsider in a vaguely insulting manner, so a Roman Legionnaire would be a barbarian warrior to the Chinese.

Crom! RAWRRGG!

Well, in real life I don't think all cultures are equal. For one thing, then the cultural custom of saying barbarian just means outsider is inferior to the cultural custom of saying one group can be more barbarous then another. Which is circular logic.

However I definitely do not think barbarian means "bestial culture composed of shirtless males and midriff-exposed females existing to titilate absurd urbanists."

[Tyneras]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

For one thing, then the cultural custom of saying barbarian just means outsider is inferior to the cultural custom of saying one group can be more barbarous then another. Which is circular logic.

I honestly can't parse this. What?

Originally Posted by jason taylor

However I definitely do not think barbarian means "bestial culture composed of shirtless males and midriff-exposed females existing to titilate absurd urbanists."

If you put Dungeon Fantasy infront of it, I certainly do, or some variation. Burly people in animal hides or light armor, horses or exotic beasts, weapons ranging from stone to steel. It's a wide range.

Without that DF, anyone can call anyone barbarians, heck two cultures could each regard the other as barbarians and themselves as paragons of civilization, since the definitions of both barbarism and civilization are arbitrary and self-serving.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by Tyneras

I honestly can't parse this. What?

"Barbarous" and "civilized" in one sense of the wording mean respectively, "worse way of ordering society" and "better way of ordering society". To say not using the concepts "barbarous" and "civilized" is an improvement on society is to say that not using those concepts is more civilized.

[jason taylor]

[QUOTE=Tyneras;1935005 since the definitions of both barbarism and civilization are arbitrary and self-serving.[/QUOTE]

No, the archetypical representations attached to them tend to be arbitrary and self-serving as indeed is the concept that there is therefore no such thing as barbarism and civilization. The abstract understanding of the concepts is not.

Every time you praise any custom you are saying it is more civilized and every time you denounce any custom(including the custom of calling things barbarous or civilized) you say it is less so. Unless you intend to ascetically renounce your right to do either in any and all cases.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by Tyneras

I honestly can't parse this. What?

I think it may be impossible to make it parse logically.

No cultures are inferior or superior. Except that every other culture in the world wrongly believes some cultures are better than others - which makes them all objectively inferior to our culture that doesn't.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

Well, in real life I don't think all cultures are equal. For one thing, then the cultural custom of saying barbarian just means outsider is inferior to the cultural custom of saying one group can be more barbarous then another.

Sure it's possible. Barbarous means acting like a barbarian, and if barbarians are outsiders, barbarous means acting like an outsider, and therefore more barbarous means acting more like an outsider. For example, group A eats quiche (Barbarian!) but also eats hamburgers (One Of Us!), whereas group B eats quiche and doesn't eat hamburgers. Therefore, group B is more barbarous than group A.

Originally Posted by Tyneras

Without that DF, anyone can call anyone barbarians, heck two cultures could each regard the other as barbarians and themselves as paragons of civilization, since the definitions of both barbarism and civilization are arbitrary and self-serving.

Eh, they're only semi-arbitrary. You can at least measure a culture's success (both direct conquest and cultural conquest).