| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It was mentioned, I believe in the Eric Mona stream that they would likely rename the Barbarian to the Berserker if they were making a new addition, but this change was maybe too big for the remaster. This peaked my interest because I already have been saying and thinking the Barbarian should be called the Berserker. I won't get into details about what Berserkers were just that if you looked at the description of the barbarian class and the Norse myths of berserkers you'd just say "this is the same image".
I also find it strange that a kind of class of people, "barbarians" was used for a class. Barbarian starting as "not roman" and evolving to mean any society which was a "non-state society". Then ofc we all know the connotations involved with state based ideologies creating a division civilized=good uncivilized=bad therefore barbarians=bad
What I'm bringing this all up to say is that, it may be too late but I really think Paizo should just pull the trigger and rename the class. The name Berserker is awesome, the myth of Berserkers is awesome. Perhaps Paizo could state in the text somehow or somewhere that "barbarian" in other books refer to the newly named Berserker? It's not likely this will happen, but how is everyone else feeling? I'm almost stoked on a PF3E just to have the word BERSERKER heading a class
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
We just had a renaming the barbarian and monk thread locked a day or 2 ago and now we have another one... Lets see if this one goes better.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I eagerly await the class optimization guide called "Berserkest".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It’s not happening in the Remaster, but I wish it was! Maybe in PF3.
If we go with Berserker, we'd have to change Rage to bersærkergang to be accurate...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It was mentioned, I believe in the Eric Mona stream that they would likely rename the Barbarian to the Berserker if they were making a new addition, but this change was maybe too big for the remaster. This peaked my interest because I already have been saying and thinking the Barbarian should be called the Berserker. I won't get into details about what Berserkers were just that if you looked at the description of the barbarian class and the Norse myths of berserkers you'd just say "this is the same image".
I also find it strange that a kind of class of people, "barbarians" was used for a class. Barbarian starting as "not roman" and evolving to mean any society which was a "non-state society". Then ofc we all know the connotations involved with state based ideologies creating a division civilized=good uncivilized=bad therefore barbarians=bad
What I'm bringing this all up to say is that, it may be too late but I really think Paizo should just pull the trigger and rename the class. The name Berserker is awesome, the myth of Berserkers is awesome. Perhaps Paizo could state in the text somehow or somewhere that "barbarian" in other books refer to the newly named Berserker? It's not likely this will happen, but how is everyone else feeling? I'm almost stoked on a PF3E just to have the word BERSERKER heading a class
Berserker makes more sense because being Berserk in current day language generally means being angry to the point of being irrational, and given how Rage in PF2 (and PF1) makes you unable to do things like Concentrate, it's pretty appropriate to associate it. Barbarian, on the other hand, is still commonly used to refer to someone who is uncivilized or savage, and is honestly only used as a holdover from previous games.
That being said, back in the old days, "Elf" was a class and not an ancestry as it was when the genre evolved, and we even have 3rd party "Dragons" as a class option, so I suppose the idea that an ancestry or a lifestyle being a class isn't really that alien, even if it feels like it now, simply because Barbarians (excuse me, Berserkers,) aren't really properly defined by being angry people. All I can really say is that it's a grognard holdover term, not unlike Monk is currently (though that one is much harder to give a proper title to; and no, we're not bringing that up in this thread again, it's merely an example).
I'm also of the opinion that the rename should happen, since they were able to do so with the Champion class before PF2 was properly released, and also because I think Berserker sounds cooler than Barbarian as a class name, and it also obviously implies "angry rageful person" in a more objective sense. If somebody new viewed the Barbarian class, one potential question they might have is "Why is this class always so angry?" And it's a fair question, because in PF1, there was the Urban Barbarian archetype which basically "replaced" its angry Rage with a different type of mechanic that functioned similar, but had its differences.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Where is the term barbarian being thrown around these days outside of the gaming context? That "one specific context" is the words usage.
Are...you really trying to argue that 'barbarian' is ONLY used in a gaming context? Seriously?
No, I'm not some sort of barbarian who would open a bottle of wine to enjoy some before offering it as a gift. That would be uncouth.
—Irv Erdos, The San Diego Union-Tribune, 11 Dec. 2016
Through its barbarian policies, it has contributed to weakening the authority and profile of the United Nations, as well as its credibility.
-UN Security Council Record, 2008
Eighteen years ago a barbarian totalitarian regime came to an end in these countries.
-Anna Záborská, Slovak politician 2007
Using Conan the Barbarian as an example of how the word is "fine" is pretty questionable as well, it's not exactly free from racial and colonial baggage itself.
Also, is the word ubiquitous outside of D&D, or not used outside of gaming? Because you've said both and I'm not sure what you're trying to say.
Like, I get that you think the word is fine, and that's wonderful for you, but you don't just get to say "Nah, it's fine' and ignore everyone else's concerns and discomfort.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be fair none of those examples seem that egregious either in terms of context.
That said, for the people defending the term... is there any particular reason it's a good term?
I see talk of 'throwing out the baby with the bathwater' and such but... is it really that worth preserving? It's not exactly a great and perfect name or anything.
Understandable.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One, (IF applicable) it's called the etymological fallacy; assuming the roots of a word have implications on or determine anything about its current meaning.
Question is how much has barbarian's meaning shifted?
When it comes to cultural bias, I'd say it has shifted. Outside of RPGs one might hear it from (a caricature of) snobs in terms of class hierarchy. Are modern bigots slandering cultures with it? That may take some research, but I'm thinking most every English speaker thinks in terms of Conan and/or RPGs, and seldom if ever Rome (et al) much less modern day "other people".
Two, the original D&D class was based on Conan (which also made the shortlist of D&D influences Gygax wrote (and his much longer lists)). Advancement for them was very slow (meaning at the same XP you might be levels behind, hardly worth it past 1st IMO). Yet extraordinary physical prowess was baked in. (Well, extraordinary then, merely Athletics & some Skill Feats nowadays). Can't recall anything re: culture except maybe they couldn't read? (A stigma which did appear in later editions.)
Three, Berserker brings baggage too IMO, referencing a more specific culture/region and the madness ascribed to them (which may or may not have been true and may or may not have been due to ingesting fungi and/or molds that induced such states). In RPGs & the fantasy genre there's also the connotation of losing control, not just "no Concentrate actions" control, but "attack nearest person" and "attack until dead" levels of crazy. "I'm raging" hardly justifies insanity, while "I'm berserking" kinda encourages it. No thank you!
Four, note that I'm okay with losing the name and its IRL flavor (however faint) if we can keep the same RPG flavor, as in warrior tapping into raw forces (as the Instincts do). But "berserker" seems a vertical move w/ some bad RPing taint remaining, not an improvement.
Shaman warrior? Dunno. Much like most other names, it's both cool and dangerous to draw from history.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Barbarian" comes from Greek, before the Romans picked up the word later on. And originally referred to someone who didn't speak Greek.
Berserking on the other hand is really a pretty small part of Norse culture, maybe it's too culture-specific to use as a name for a class that's supposed to work for more than just that one culture?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like being a barbarian from an outsider tribe who ensures civility through strength arms.
We just had a renaming the barbarian and monk thread locked a day or 2 ago and now we have another one... Lets see if this one goes better.
I should have looked up if this was already brought up! My bad!
"Barbarian" comes from Greek, before the Romans picked up the word later on. And originally referred to someone who didn't speak Greek.
Berserking on the other hand is really a pretty small part of Norse culture, maybe it's too culture-specific to use as a name for a class that's supposed to work for more than just that one culture?
Is this really an issue though? I really don't think it matters that we use the Norse word for the thing the class is inspired by even if people create versions that are part of different cultures
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Are...you really trying to argue that 'barbarian' is ONLY used in a gaming context? Seriously?
Obviously I am not arguing it is only used in the context of RPGs. However it is certainly primarily used for such contexts. I am saying the word is ubiquitous in many games with class based systems. Like Diablo, Balder's gate, etc.
Of course the word can be used in its original context. But I've heard someone use the word lunatic with its original context too. If the usage has moved on in 99% of cases then the meaning has well and truly shifted.
Like, I get that you think the word is fine, and that's wonderful for you, but you don't just get to say "Nah, it's fine' and ignore everyone else's concerns and discomfort.
Of course I don't get to just say "Nah, it's fine". But finding a term that someone isn't uncomfortable with is literally an impossible task. As the thread states Berserker is in for consideration. And I have no problem with the term, but as Castilliano rightly points out, you can argue it is even more problematic. I mean I could go through and make arguments against the names Witch, Thaumaturge, Alchemist, Rogue, Druid, and more if I really felt like it(really virtually if not all of them).
But most of those names/classes are really just shorthands that at this point are baked in and tell you generically what the class is about. And that sort of shorthand is useful. Removing it should yield a sizable benefit. Not trade one name for one just as bad or worse.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
“Barbarian” is whatever on its own merit. It’s a word with a long legacy in the fantasy space, but it doesn’t have any actual connection definitionally to be an unarmored berserk warrior - so why call the class that?
Where things get really thorny, however, is placing them in the world. Golarion has a great many nations inspired by those on Earth, and when you start saying things like “Fantasy Africa has many Barbarians” or “Fantasy Vietnam makes more Barbarians than Fighters.” I don’t like that the Barbarian class acts as an indicator of how ‘civilized’ a people are meant to be, and if that’s not the intent… then again, the Barbarian name is worthless here.
I think “the guy who goes berserk” as the defining class trait should be called Berserker.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
“Tell you what the class is about”
How does Barbarian do that?
“It’s a nature class!” It is not.
“It’s about surviving in the wilds!” It is not.
“It’s uncivilized!” It is not.
It’s legacy for the sake of legacy and refusal to adapt, we’ve already renamed Paladin. “Barbarian” has no justification other than “that’s been its name” which is not a justification.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
“Barbarian” is whatever on its own merit. It’s a word with a long legacy in the fantasy space, but it doesn’t have any actual connection definitionally to be an unarmored berserk warrior - so why call the class that?
Where things get really thorny, however, is placing them in the world. Golarion has a great many nations inspired by those on Earth, and when you start saying things like “Fantasy Africa has many Barbarians” or “Fantasy Vietnam makes more Barbarians than Fighters.” I don’t like that the Barbarian class acts as an indicator of how ‘civilized’ a people are meant to be, and if that’s not the intent… then again, the Barbarian name is worthless here.
I think “the guy who goes berserk” as the defining class trait should be called Berserker.
jumping off from your point: The thing I really want to drive home is that the way the Barbarian class functions, mechanically and aesthetically, is a dead ringer for the actual Berserkers. The term fits 1 to 1 with what Barbarians do, it fits better than the word Barbarian
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The reason to change barbarian to berserker is the same as the reason to change spell level to spell rank. It is more accurate. It is mechanically descriptive. It avoids confusing barbarian the class, with barbarian the culture.
Yes there is some cultural context around barbarian, but for me anyway that is not the point. Removing all the words that can be used badly is impossible - we would have no words left. If the only word in our language was grunt, there would be good grunts and bad grunts. However changing terms to improve clarity is worthwhile.
The reason to change barbarian to berserker is the same as the reason to change spell level to spell rank. It is more accurate. It is mechanically descriptive. It avoids confusing barbarian the class, with barbarian the culture.
Yes there is some cultural context around barbarian, but for me anyway that is not the point. Removing all the words that can be used badly is impossible - we would have no words left. If the only word in our language was grunt, there would be good grunts and bad grunts. However changing terms to improve clarity is worthwhile.
Better way of saying what I wanted to say. My posts are more about being pro-berserker as a term and less about being anti-barbarian
Going in a different direction for a new name, all of the instincts except fury and superstition are all based on channeling or manifesting some sort of energy or magic. A simple berserker isn't growing deer antlers or lighting their sword ablaze are they? There is a magical side to most of them, while there really that amount of magic in the other martial classes except like magus and the champion. I'm not even sure the monk compares. I say Paizo leans into this magical nature in PF3 by calling them the channeler, medium, vessel, or something like that. You can even keep flurry as channeling pure rage. Berserker is just flat and boring by comparison.
Berserkers are sometimes described as a kind of sorcerer, so yes
I wonder if just renaming it Bloodrager would be on the table
Already a thing in Pathfinder, sorcerer(the class) and barbarian hybrid
I wonder if just renaming it Bloodrager would be on the tableAlready a thing in Pathfinder, sorcerer(the class) and barbarian hybrid
In PF1.
It's not, to my knowledge, in PF2.
Good catch!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We could make this as reductive as possible. Fighter? No complaints. Ranger? No complaints. So lets go. Rager. Done.
May I also suggest, Healer, Caster, Fister, Performer and Stabber for the other etymologically loaded classes? Hmmm, and Blocker. And other Caster. And other other Caster. All right, it needs some work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We could make this as reductive as possible. Fighter? No complaints. Ranger? No complaints. So lets go. Rager. Done.
May I also suggest, Healer, Caster, Fister, Performer and Stabber for the other etymologically loaded classes? Hmmm, and Blocker. And other Caster. And other other Caster. All right, it needs some work.
I had deleted a post replying to someone else because I felt I was being too argumentative but I think some of what I said there still bears saying.
I said some to the effect of:
This is getting derailed from what I wanted to talk about which was the possibility of the name change, not arguing about whether the term barbarian is problematic or not. I frequently make the statement, inspired by an article on the subject, that "communists are barbarians" that we (communists) seek to break down all the class, gendered and racial political categories of the civilized state societies. If you notice I called into question the assumption that civilized is good, not whether calling people uncivilized is problematic. The term Barbarian refers to a kind of people who exist(ed) in non-state societies (which are awesome), but really doesn't refer akind of warrior outside of the specific fantasy context and the reductive views of people in non-state societies. Berserker is a kind of warrior in Norse myth, their abilities, both magical and mundane, match the flavor and mechanics of the Barbarian
When you bring up naming things generic terms, you really aren't tackling the thing I'm talking about. I'm suggesting a more flavorful and evocative name. I am suggesting berserker not because of the modern English word "berserk" but because of the old Norse warriors referred to as berserkers in the sagas and such
I wonder if just renaming it Bloodrager would be on the table
Thought about it myself, but it's missing crucial elements for such a name, and it already has an identity from PF1 that doesn't mesh with its mechanics demonstrated in PF2.
The term "Bloodrager" can mean a few things, so already it's hard to nail it down to begin with, and even if it wasn't, it's not exactly fleshed out enough to warrant what it could entail. If it's about your blood being magical (at least, to the point that your rage gives you power), there's already the Sorcerer class for this identity niche (as evoking your bloodline powers can be contributed to a sense of rage), and it would be infringing on those toes. And if we used the PF1 identity, then the class lacking a means of spellcasting (or other similar magical abilities) doesn't really track with the existing mechanics.
Granted, they could have come up with a new ability for the class, but honestly, "Instinct" is just a fancy way of making the Totem feat chains in PF1 a class choice instead of a feat choice, and "Rage" as a feature isn't magical enough (at least, until you invest feats into it), nor does it involve spellcasting in general (as it shouldn't, because you generally can't cast spells while raging unless they lack Verbal components).
If PF1 didn't already use the term, it might have been a neat substitution, but honestly, I'd much rather stick with Berserker, given that Rage is a central part of the class, and the term "Berserk" is synonymous with the term "Rage." Barbarian? Not so much.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As an aside in fairness to Howard (who IRL had ugly beliefs), his Conan differed from Arnold's Conan. In the novels Conan is multilingual, had thieving skills, strategic acumen, and with cunning duped the civilized* who thought less of him for his origins. Oh, and he regularly wore chain mail, even plate (though rarely IIRC due the environments he traversed in and/or his inability to budget his loot). And he did rage, though one could argue most warrior heroes do, drawing on that last reserve or finding some emotional motivation for a climactic surge to survive/win.
*Which in his world were mostly corrupt, weak, even stupid albeit educated.
---
And as mentioned, Instinct abilities have outstripped going berserk.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Call the class what you like a barbarian, berserker, or rageaholic, the core mechanic for the class is rage, there are 25 class feats with the rage trait. It doesn't matter if your character lives in a big city, wears the latest high fashion, and is an intellectual. Rage is generally considered uncivilized. Outside of a battlefield, most civil society with laws, raging will have consequences. Even raging here in the Paizo forums has consequences... The last thread on barbarians got locked down. Rage is not a job skill that's in high demand, especially when it affects your concentration.
I don't see the barbarian as a culture unto itself, it's more of an individual lifestyle shaped by the consequences of rage. How someone with rage fits in could vary greatly from culture to culture, and how that character is played very from character to charactor.
Call the class what you like a barbarian, berserker, or rageaholic, the core mechanic for the class is rage, there are 25 class feats with the rage trait. It doesn't matter if your character lives in a big city, wears the latest high fashion, and is an intellectual. Rage is generally considered uncivilized. Outside of a battlefield, most civil society with laws, raging will have consequences. Even raging here in the Paizo forums has consequences... The last thread on barbarians got locked down. Rage is not a job skill that's in high demand, especially when it affects your concentration.
I don't see the barbarian as a culture unto itself, it's more of an individual lifestyle shaped by the consequences of rage. How someone with rage fits in could vary greatly from culture to culture, and how that character is played very from character to charactor.
The industrial revolution and it's consequences smh smh
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am going to be honest, I don't prefer Berserker, because frankly that word is almost as loaded with historical weirdness as "Barbarian". And in a way that entrenches the class in things that I would rather see opened up.
I love Rage as a class mechanic, but I dislike Rage as a locked in flavor for that class mechanic. I would rather see done away with and replaced with something like "Battle Trance". A state where your mind focuses in on pure battle at the expense of other things. Rage may be one of the things that sends a character into a Battle Trance, but so may extreme discipline, meditation, letting the spirits of your ancestors/a dragon/a giant take over for you, or any of a variety of other things.
I think this idea as a whole would make the class more interesting, and would allow for more varied types of Barbarians. And I think it would make the term Barbarian less objectionable as it would decouple the idea of native people with mindless rage.
Berserker feels like it would reinforce the idea of the class as a rager in the collective consciousness rather than allow it more room to breath.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
By the same logic you would be saying "Fantasy Africa has a lot of Berserkers" and "Fantasy Vietnam makes more Berserkers than Fighters" and I seriously don't believe that make for a better situtation. Its just trading one good name for a more specific name with even more issues.“Barbarian” is whatever on its own merit. It’s a word with a long legacy in the fantasy space, but it doesn’t have any actual connection definitionally to be an unarmored berserk warrior - so why call the class that?
Where things get really thorny, however, is placing them in the world. Golarion has a great many nations inspired by those on Earth, and when you start saying things like “Fantasy Africa has many Barbarians” or “Fantasy Vietnam makes more Barbarians than Fighters.” I don’t like that the Barbarian class acts as an indicator of how ‘civilized’ a people are meant to be, and if that’s not the intent… then again, the Barbarian name is worthless here.
I think “the guy who goes berserk” as the defining class trait should be called Berserker.
Except no one is saying that.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
By the same logic you would be saying "Fantasy Africa has a lot of Berserkers" and "Fantasy Vietnam makes more Berserkers than Fighters" and I seriously don't believe that make for a better situtation. Its just trading one good name for a more specific name with even more issues.
‘Barbarian’ describes how uncivilized you are. ‘Berserker’ describes the fighting style of the class. Can you tell me what issue the latter has? I’m genuinely not seeing any.
Berserker is by far more fitting to what the class is and does than Barbarian has or ever will be. It also doesn't have any real-world baggage and isn't linked to any specific mental illness so unless you count phrases such as, "That guy just went berserk" as inherently negative there can't be any objection on those grounds.
As for a Battle Trancer, there is room for a class between Monk and Berserker that does the whole enter a stance at the start of an encounter to gain bonuses shtick. Instinctive Warrior might work better than Battle Trancer as a class name for this middle-ground class.