...the Shoanti revere abstract powers of nature, their ancestors, and tribal totems.
I believe the Shoanti might make a good stand-in, until you find a better solution.
Contributor
|
Will there be a place for barbarians that live a more plains native american lifestyle. Barbarians always seem the Conan type and granted there are some similarities but not the same. It always seemed a natural lifestyle for barbarians of certain areas.
We have nothing planned related to this at the moment, but we have discussed the inclusion of cultures analogous to those of the pre-Columbian Amerindians.
What I will fight against, tooth and nail, is the illogical cross-pollination of Amerindian cultures from vastly different environments. No cultures with adobe huts, teepees, and totem poles, for example.
Of course the classic "plains Indians" are most decidedly NOT pre-Columbian, given that their defining cultural feature is horse-riding. Before the late 18th century, the Cheyenne, the Sioux, and other such groups lived in much the same way as the various Algonquian and Iroquoian peoples of the East--building permanent lodges and growing corn and squash along the rivers in the eastern part of the great plains. Bison hunting was a fairly minor part of their economy, since it's pretty hard to hunt bison on foot.
Most of our archetypes of native Americans are by default post-Columbian because by the time Europeans encountered them the effects of contact had spread ahead of the Europeans. We know very little about the Mound Builders who were apparently a very civilized culture dominating most of the Mississippi and Ohio river valleys. By the time De Soto visited the region in the 1540s, their cities were completely depopulated, at least in part, the speculation is, because of diseases introduced from Europe. We have few images of pre-Columbian cultures because outside of the Caribbean, Mexico, and Peru, the effects of epidemics, possibly compounded by climate change (14th and 17th centuries were exceptionally cold) and ecological stress, changed the cultures before Europeans could observe them first hand.
At the risk of being boring, I'll state again here that the mechanical translation of cultures from our world into the D&D world is kind of a turn-off for me. Not that real world cultures can't be used for inspiration, I just hate it when "the Sioux" or whoever get plopped down in the middle of the fantasy world with no thought about their organic origins within the setting, and without any changes to make them fit in with their surroundings. I'm not against syncretic combinations of elements from real-world cultures, although the particular one that Mike McArtor cites above would be illogical, given that the three elements in question indicate a reliance on three different kinds of resource bases. I wouldn't object, though, to a group that built adobe houses and erected totems representing clan tutelary spirits or ancestors, as long as the totems were built out of something other than wood, which is presumably in short supply if you're building with adobe. And of course teepee-dwellers are almost certainly nomadic and it would be a horrible inconvenience to drag those totem poles around with them when they move camp. ;)
On barbarians--although Conan is kind of our archetypal barbarian, the "barbarian" class's key feature is raging--which is modeled on the viking berserkers. There is probably someone on the boards who knows more than berserkers than I, but as I understand it there was a religious element to their behavior. They went into battle naked or dressed only in a shirt made of bear-hide (this is the root of the term berserk--which could be literally translated into English as bear-sark, sark being a dialect term for a shirt). There is speculation that they derived their mystical bravery in part from the consumption of psychotropic mushrooms--but of course this is something that will never be written into official gaming material because it might be interpreted as encouraging drug-abuse IRL. Anyhow, if we wanted to pull this basic idea out of its historical context, we could cast members of the barbarian class as mystical warriors who are somehow tied to the clan's protective spirits or that sort of thing. Rage, then, becomes a matter of being seized by the totem spirit and driven into a mad frenzy, becoming a swath of whirling destruction aimed at the tribe's enemies. In my mind, the barbarian class is much more interesting when explained this way--and it even makes the idea of the barbarian translatable to somewhat more civilized cultures. The "dervish" archetype (not the CW prestige class, but the idea of the fanatical, vaguely middle eastern-flavored warrior) could be built using barbarian as a base class in this way. Spirit-possessed warriors pop up here and there all over the real world, especially among groups of people who are stressed or threatened, outmatched by enemies who are sure to drive them to extinction if they cannot resist with a super-human fervor.
Conan, at least in the Robert E. Howard original, is more a fighter-rogue than a barbarian, if the character's abilities are translated into D&D terms. He does have nearly superhuman strength and toughness, but definitely no rage ability. He is a "barbarian" merely because he comes from a place deemed to be less civilized than the lands he adventures in.
|
Contributor
|
Of course the classic "plains Indians" are most decidedly NOT pre-Columbian, given that their defining cultural feature is horse-riding.
Yes, you are absolutely correct. I should not have used the pre-Columbian modifier, since any culture we introduce based off Amerindian cultures (and no, we're not just going to drop the Sioux into Golarion) will have access to horses and be on the same continent as our European-based fantasy cultures.
|
I guess I would say some aboriginal people who live close to the land in a way even the typical D&D Barbarians do not. Who are excellent trackers, hide very well in their environments, etc.
My idea of the Plains Indians was that there is a certain connection with their land, they know every inch of it, and they can hide (much like the Fremen of Dune or the Aiel in the Wheel of Time) in a small crease in the terrain. Their warriors are feared by the civilized peoples. I think they would maybe not be pure barbarians or not everyone would be...
I have always thought that this type of group would be a great addition to a setting.
But then I love the Green Men of Barsoon - so there is no accounting for taste.
Wouldn't it be best to make these guys rangers? "Barbarian" seems more like a moniker "civilized" people would put on them, rather than its direct meaning in DnD terms.
I recently spent a few days in Chicago, including a lengthy and informative day at the Field Museum. They just so happened to have a very wonderful exhibit on America's early peoples.
To see these ancient spears, arrows, axes, jewelry, and amazing pottery and the like has only increased my desire to see something analogous to Native American peoples.
For some reason I can almost imagine Elves making a great match for this.
Hooray for Barsoom and its Green Men!
Sorry Mike--I think I was being a bit pendantic this morning!
Maybe Rangers would be more appropriate but I do not think that quite captures it either... But in game terms maybe that is the way it would have to go...
Thanks for the support for the Green Men - it just doesn't get any better than that...
I think rangers and barbarians with Native Americans. Especially since that article on lupin came out in Dragon. But I'm parital to lupin and my totem is Wolf so I might be a little prejudiced.
|
Contributor
|
I think rangers and barbarians with Native Americans. Especially since that article on lupin came out in Dragon. But I'm parital to lupin and my totem is Wolf so I might be a little prejudiced.
Oh yeah, I'm sure the author of that article (he he) had Amerindian cultures in mind when writing it. ;)
For some reason I can almost imagine Elves making a great match for this.
For some reason i See tribal halflings.
(maybe cause i like the 'running elves' from Dark Sun)
The "barbarian" class's key feature is raging--which is modeled on the viking berserkers.
Although the Berserks like Kveldulf and Berdla-Kari (Egil's Saga) are an obvious source, let's not also forget Cuchulainn, the "Hound of Ulster" of Irish myth, who would go into his riastarthae ("Warp-Frenzy") and kill everyone he encountered; it would take 3 vats of cold water to "douse" him from it to where he could think straight again. Also, the god Indra in the Vedas was all wimpy until he ingested the Soma (mushrooms?), at which point he could kill dragons. There's certainly no shortage of legendary archetypes there!
Can you berzerk while mounted? I'm already finding it difficult to imagine nomadic hunters using the the Shoanti's sample weapons (huge hammers, snaggy shield-blades).
Dude--that would totally rock. I'm gonna have to make a mounted barbarian ASAP.