Oh, I agree. I recently played in a game where the barbary tribes of Rome were beginning to threaten the central nation of Greece, where we worked for Eratosthenes and the Library of Alexandria as artifact-hunters. But notably, we had four different kinds of 'barbarian' in that game as PCs-- a barbarian Barbarian of the North who was savage and violent, but sought prestige to bring honor home to the clan; a barbarian Fighter, who had once been a Paladin of Odin, but abandoned her comrades in battle out of cowardice and became an ordinary fighter; a barbarian Barbarian of the Far East who'd been a Siamese sailor before she was captured and sold into slavery as a bodyguard by Middle-Eastern lords; and a barbarian Oracle, who was a princess of a semi-"Nubian" nation south of Alexandria, who was treated as cultured by the Greeks and Egyptians around us, compared to the rest. (As you might imagine, this was a Pathfinder game. :) )
I asked to be sure because, while I think your suggestions for potential motivations behind barbarian tribes that are active players somewhere in the history of your setting are EXCELLENT, I would be sad as a player if playing the class 'Barbarian', or a barbarian character, was limited to only these types of barbarian. (After all, there are barbarian Sorcerors and civilized Barbarians who just get angry sometimes, I'm sure!)
I've known some DMs who don't like to use nonhumans when they can avoid it, or by contrast, some groups who like to play all monstrous races (a full half-orc party, for example); by that token, I'd say 'It's a ___ thing, you wouldn't understand' gives the DM more leeway to mold a specific fantasy setting, as a suggested style choice. Then maybe a DM can say that Orcs are the sensible, normal guys, and it's humans who keep pillaging their stuff, etc. etc.
I really like your suggestion of combining all three of your suggested reasons for barbarians to be attacking. Multiple tribes of barbarians within the same setting lend to a richness of NPC interaction that can really make a game memorable.
Other ways to distinguish barbarian tribes from, I guess, 'civilizations' include:
-Actually, it was ours first
The barbarians are the original inhabitants of the area, and their ruins all over lend a fearful superstition to daily life for the civilization that has since established themselves in the city. Maybe they took it unfairly from the barbarians, or maybe they'd thought the barbarians were long gone, not realizing that when [event] happened, they'd be back-- whatever the case, they're here now, and it's war for the civilization (and possibly the PCs) if they want to keep the land where the ruins are located instead of moving.
I think of the above as being somewhat equivalent to Conan deciding to collect a bunch of his fellows and retake his hometown through sneaking and scare tactics, prior to the direct combat. They might be smart and scary, but they are also dispossessed of their home, so no reason for them not to be angry, brutish, or mostly naked!
-We're the first guys here!
Barbarian explorers who trample the land before them and claim everything as their own, choosing not to recognize the indigenous cultures as worthy/real/whatever; I'd say this is pretty close to your "It's an Orc thing" idea.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: Thursday, March 8th, 2012 10:59 pm (UTC)I asked to be sure because, while I think your suggestions for potential motivations behind barbarian tribes that are active players somewhere in the history of your setting are EXCELLENT, I would be sad as a player if playing the class 'Barbarian', or a barbarian character, was limited to only these types of barbarian. (After all, there are barbarian Sorcerors and civilized Barbarians who just get angry sometimes, I'm sure!)
I've known some DMs who don't like to use nonhumans when they can avoid it, or by contrast, some groups who like to play all monstrous races (a full half-orc party, for example); by that token, I'd say 'It's a ___ thing, you wouldn't understand' gives the DM more leeway to mold a specific fantasy setting, as a suggested style choice. Then maybe a DM can say that Orcs are the sensible, normal guys, and it's humans who keep pillaging their stuff, etc. etc.
I really like your suggestion of combining all three of your suggested reasons for barbarians to be attacking. Multiple tribes of barbarians within the same setting lend to a richness of NPC interaction that can really make a game memorable.
Other ways to distinguish barbarian tribes from, I guess, 'civilizations' include:
-Actually, it was ours first
The barbarians are the original inhabitants of the area, and their ruins all over lend a fearful superstition to daily life for the civilization that has since established themselves in the city. Maybe they took it unfairly from the barbarians, or maybe they'd thought the barbarians were long gone, not realizing that when [event] happened, they'd be back-- whatever the case, they're here now, and it's war for the civilization (and possibly the PCs) if they want to keep the land where the ruins are located instead of moving.
I think of the above as being somewhat equivalent to Conan deciding to collect a bunch of his fellows and retake his hometown through sneaking and scare tactics, prior to the direct combat. They might be smart and scary, but they are also dispossessed of their home, so no reason for them not to be angry, brutish, or mostly naked!
-We're the first guys here!
Barbarian explorers who trample the land before them and claim everything as their own, choosing not to recognize the indigenous cultures as worthy/real/whatever; I'd say this is pretty close to your "It's an Orc thing" idea.