Elemental Rage -- Page 10.
I thought that I saw a title that might have been about this earlier, but I couldn't find it.
A whole 1d6 extra points of damage? For 12 points? Ok, so it is with every attack, but still. At 12th level, he gets 3 attacks so on average he will do 10.5 points of extra damage -- assuming that all the attacks hit -- for 12 rage points. With powerful blow, he will get an extra 12 points of damage on the first attack -- the one most likely to hit -- for only 6 points.
Just feels a bit off on the power table.
I'll just come out and say it: I don't like this one at all. It just doesn't fit with me, that raging fury translates to elemental power. Its too magicy for me and seems to exist solely to allow the Barbarian to smash through a bit of damage reduction. Just my 2 cents.
Infamous Jum wrote: I'll just come out and say it: I don't like this one at all. It just doesn't fit with me, that raging fury translates to elemental power. Its too magicy for me and seems to exist solely to allow the Barbarian to smash through a bit of damage reduction. Just my 2 cents. I agree. My preference is that the barbarian not have any ability that could be seen as supernatural... at least not in the core books. The rage ability is defined as (Ex), not (Su) so the rage abilities should comply with this.
I suppose there could be a variant barbarian with some kind of "Elemental Totem" power or somesuch, but I'd prefer to see that kind of stuff in a supplement rather than as core rules.
This is a repeat of other threads, in particular this one which is specifically about Elemental Rage.
As for my reasons why I strongly and almost entirely disagree with you on the point of supernatural powers being in the repertoire of the barbarian, look there or on the several other threads about Barbarian Rage in general where Elemental Rage is brought up. In summary: Berserkers, Cu Culainn, Thor, Maenad, etc.
Pneumonica wrote: This is a repeat of other threads, in particular this one which is specifically about Elemental Rage.
As for my reasons why I strongly and almost entirely disagree with you on the point of supernatural powers being in the repertoire of the barbarian, look there or on the several other threads about Barbarian Rage in general where Elemental Rage is brought up. In summary: Berserkers, Cu Culainn, Thor, Maenad, etc.
Let us examine the barbarians you cite:
berserkers, or bare sarks were pretty badass. However, one of Hrolf Kraki's heroes beats down a dozen of them singly and in a group. And neither Hrolf Kraki's hero, nor the berserkers displayed any supernatural abilities such as doing fire damage with their weapons.
Cu Chulain displayed some abilities that could be considered supernatural, I'll grant you that. But the rage ability is stated as being (Ex), NOT (Su). Also, I think Cu Culainn could arguably be called a fighter rather than a barbarian, but this is a rather esoteric point.
Thor was a Norse deity. It's pretty hard to say whether his supernatural abilities stemmed from his class level or from his being a god. My personal opinion is the latter, since the mortal heroes of Norse myth didn't ever do energy damage with a non-magical weapon in any of the texts I've read.
Maenads aren't a specific person, but a group of "wild women" followers of the Greek god Dionysus. Again, it is arguable as to whether or not they can be called barbarians, but even if we grant them that class, I still don't recall them doing much of anything magical in any of the literature. Pretty much they were just savage, cannibalistic women that, in groups, could tear a man to pieces. This is a far cry from doing acid damage with a non-magical battleaxe.
Some other barbarians I can site from myth, legend and literature are shown to be bereft of such magic. Conan, who may be the archetypal barbarian of modern fantasy is entirely without magic, as are most of the other barbarians which borrow from him. I could also mention a number of Hrolf Kraki's heroes (the Norse version of Arthur's Knights) could be considered barbarians, but for the most part, had no magic.
Also, I didn't say that I disapproved entirely of barbarians having supernatural abilities. I simply don't think a core barbarian should have them. But since this rage ability is optional it isn't really a huge point of contention with me.
Moondarq wrote: Cu Chulain displayed some abilities that could be considered supernatural, I'll grant you that. But the rage ability is stated as being (Ex), NOT (Su). Also, I think Cu Culainn could arguably be called a fighter rather than a barbarian, but this is a rather esoteric point. He's the definition of a berserker. And obviously a barbarian can channel supernatural forces through his or her rage - Cu Culainn could, and when it comes to the D&D definition of a barbarian being "a warrior who fights using rage as a battle tactic", he's the man.
Moondarq wrote: Maenads aren't a specific person, but a group of "wild women" followers of the Greek god Dionysus. Again, it is arguable as to whether or not they can be called barbarians, but even if we grant them that class, I still don't recall them doing much of anything magical in any of the literature. Pretty much they were just savage, cannibalistic women that, in groups, could tear a man to pieces. This is a far cry from doing acid damage with a non-magical battleaxe. They could either fly or leap preternaturally well (they moved on wings of pathos), and could use their fingers as talons to tear people to shreads. And acrylic nails weren't invented at the time. ;-p
Moondarq wrote: Some other barbarians I can site from myth, legend and literature are shown to be bereft of such magic. Conan, who may be the archetypal barbarian of modern fantasy is entirely without magic, as are most of the other barbarians which borrow from him. I could also mention a number of Hrolf Kraki's heroes (the Norse version of Arthur's Knights) could be considered barbarians, but for the most part, had no magic. So some barbarians don't have supernatural abilities - this is why the abilities are optional. And thank you for mentioning Conan - he used several supernatural abilities. He has at points used abilities similar to rebuking undead, banishment (of demons), and reading a scroll (actually an inscription on a wall) to summon a demon guardian of a temple. He is the textbook example of a barbarian who uses supernatural abilities.
Pneumonica wrote: He's the definition of a berserker. And obviously a barbarian can channel supernatural forces through his or her rage - Cu Culainn could, and when it comes to the D&D definition of a barbarian being "a warrior who fights using rage as a battle tactic", he's the man. Well first I would say that berserkers are a whole other animal. "Rage" certainly fits the berserker, but I've always thought of it as something more akin to an adrenaline burst, like those stories about people lifting cars to save loved ones and such. But thats probably a distinction many wouldn't agree with. Secondly, it would seem to me that Cu Culainn's abilities were due to being the son of a god more than anything else. Again, maybe I'm just splitting hairs here. I calls 'em like I sees 'em.
To me, a barbarian is one who has lived without all the comforts and safeties of a civilized world. Wheres a fighter draws from rigorous training in the weapons, armor, and tactics of war, the barbarian draws from the very basic need to survive. Each day is a bitter struggle to see the next dawn. It is survival of the fittest. It is in this struggle that a barbarian learns to push past his breaking point, to fight on with every last ounce of strength and determination, to rise up when another man would fall. In these struggles they become not men of war but savage beasts, developing speed and agility beyond that of their foes. They tap into a powerful force within, a primordial will to survive that men of the civilized world have forgotten, let atrophy and vanish. It is not magic that powers them, but a deep connection to their primitive ancestry, a will to fight and live that suppresses the pain, fear, and fatigue that would put down a lesser man.
I'm no anthropologist, but I don't remember any cave drawings of dudes cracking lighting out of their clubs. But thats just my view and maybe it isn't for everyone. Maybe people want to see barbarians fly and spit acid and what not. And thats fine. But I know its something I won't be using when I play as barbarians, for whatever thats worth to you.
The inscription Conan reads on the wall would have worked the same for anyone able to read it. Unless you consider literacy a supernatural ability. And actually, for a barbarian maybe it would be.
I'm not familiar with any of R. E. Howard's stories having Conan turn undead. I do recall a story where an item Conan buys from a peddler turns out to be a magic charm that protects Conan from shadowy demons during a battle.
I'm not doubting your argument, but maybe you can tell me which stories you are citing?
As for the maenads, I'd call the claws extraordinary rather than supernatural (despite their origin). And again, I think their definition as barbarians is suspect. They were zapped by a god into that incarnation. I'd say that Dionysus simply took ordinary Greek women and applied a badass template to them. One of the template abilities would be the rage ability (like a badger has).
Also I forgot about the wings of Pathos thing. Maybe we should give the barbarian "Fly" as a class skill?
As for the mythic argument, I'll concede that point that legendary and mythic characters did have supernatural abilities. But a lot of these figures are gods, related to gods, or have other unusual backgrounds. At the very least most of them would be epic, and thus have access to all kinds of crazy feats beyond the ken of mortal players.
Ultimately it is a matter of taste. In my campaign, barbarians are more pulpy than mythy. I suppose that a barbarian who prays to the "Flamebird" totem could indeed manifest fire damage through his longspear. Conan never conjured acid onto his battle axe simply by getting angry. I guess he just didn't choose that rage ability.
Of course, mythic heroes are ascribed powerful deities as parents because they were so badass. Seriously, Hercules is so awesome, Zeus must have been his father! At least, that's what the common people would be thinking. D+D characters are going to eventually surpass the mightiest of the mythic heroes (who top out around 10th level), and common people are going to start saying their parents were gods. PC heroes should be able to acquire abilities to follow suit. Merlin was also ascribed deities (or at least supernatural entities in the christianized versions) as his parents, and no one goes around complaining that your average 9th level wizard outclasses Merlin by a factor of 10 or more.
Disliking supernatural powers for melee characters is basically saying they can't play at high levels. Seriously, there's a 'you must be this tall to play' bar around 9th level which requires supernatural abilities to compete.
The problem with elemental rage is not that its supernatural, its that its awful. It should work as follows: 3 rage points - all your melee damage this round is instead elemental damage. You choose the type of damage (fire, cold, acid, electricity, sonic). Simple, worthwhile, and actually does something useful.
pneumonica wrote: They could either fly or leap preternaturally well (they moved on wings of pathos) Why would you take that literally? I can recall no story where the furies did either. It means they were fueled by raw emotion.
Recent threads in Races & Classes
|
