Should barbarians be allowed to wear armor?

The whole naked barbarian meme is way too pauldroncore fantasy for me

...

...

5e handled it correctly by giving Barbarians different reasons to use either Medium armor or going unarmored.

I'm perfectly okay with both the archetypes of the Herculean tank and the Panther-like dexterous warrior coexisting.

>The armor and jade

It just dawned on me... is Conan an East-meets-West setting?

>conan wore armor,
But when Conan wore armor he stopped being a barbarian and became a fighter.

Anyways, Conan isn't the best example because he was really a Thief/Warrior.

Slaine was the true barbarian.

As do I

I think so.

It's like, just don't make such a big deal about them needing to fight unarmored.

But then again, I also think that you don't need any special game-mechanical distinction between civilized warriors and barbarians, aside from different stat and skill allocations to reflect a different upbringing and values, and perhaps higher combat skills to reflect the greater combat experience of a typical barbarian soldier.

>Conan the barbarian
>Not a barbarian

More or less, with its own sort of continental drift. It's somewhere placed before the ice age and the fall of Atlantis, Lemuria and all of that.

>greater combat experience of a typical barbarian soldier.
Is that actually true? I would think a professional soldier like a Roman legionaire would have far greater combat experience than a barbarian that only fought intermittently.

>Black Kingdoms.

Ha!

You can have a background as a barbarian (savage from outside civilization) and not have the class Barbarian (berserker). One could argue Conan's title there is based on the former.

WE

wouldn't a professional soldier have large amounts of garrisoning time, while a barbarian might be fighting in smaller raids and skirmishes more often?

Obv. depending on the time period of course

...

Wait, I thought "barbarian savages" was what you guys WANTED black people to be portrayed as.

>Should barbarians be allowed to wear armor?
>allowed
What makes you think a barbarian is going to listen to you?

>check and mate!

How long before they make Conan the King of his own Kingdom?

By Crom! He Will!

Maybe barbarians should only be allowed to wear armor they make themselves from the body parts of their fallen enemies or monsters.

That's dumb because then they just wear hides from magical monsters that are functionally identical to heavy armor like dragonplate or Manticore skin or whatever. It's like druids using ironwood shit as a copout

I thought it was after Atlantis but before Aryans conquered India, or was that just the movie?

It's after the fall of Atlantis, but it's not clear before exactly what (ice age, recorded history etc).

>conan wore armor
Hell, Conan wore plate once he rose through the ranks.

He was king in the first story ever published.

Actual barbarians did wear armor. So yes.

Barbarians should be full nude like Celts or Beowulf in the movie

good one

The idea is that a barbarian would be exposed to near-constant violence warfare and raiding. That is as opposed to a civilized soldier who lives peacefully much of his life before serving, then spends most of his service between training and being garrisoned.

And yeah, it does depend on a lot of stuff. I'm picturing the sword-and-sorcery stereotypes more than any particular historical period.

>How long before they make Conan the King of his own Kingdom?
At least 85 years ago.

I'm not an expert on Conan, but "The Phoenix on the Sword" published in Weird Tales in 1932 and featured Conan as king of Aquilonia.

>violence warfare
While this looks like it could be the title of the next triple-A shooter, I meant to write "Tribal Warfare".

I actually thought you forgot to put a comma in there, but "violence warfare" is evoking all kinds of trash images in my mind. Like bad flick from the 90's levels of trash.

The term you are looking for is 'fun'.

>kys
Kill yourself.

Yes, but it needs to be just as Barbaric as the user.

She doesn't look straight out of a Wyatt Mann comic, so still not good enough.

That was the wrong picture.

But BARBARIANS none the less.

Post more barbarians fuckers

Diablo 3 Barbarians are one of my favorites.

D3 Barbarian is pretty dope

When I think "Armored Fantasy Barbarian" D3 Barbarian always comes to mind.

The heaviest kind of armor Conan ever wore was chainmail.

I don't see why not. I assume they just didn't wear armor because they didn't have the resources/knowledge to mine and refine ore. I could see them wear bits and pieces of armor they picked up off of people they killed if the size fit them though.

I am sure they would totally wear armor if they could though. I don't see why they would be opposed to it if the option was offered to them.

I've struggled with this, and come to roughly the same conclusion. In D&D class terms, Conan would not really be a barbarian.

It is outright stated in Black Colossus that they make him wear plate instead of chain.

I'm pretty sure Conan's age is post-sinking-of-Atlantis, because his people, the Cimmerians, are descendants of the survivors of Atlantis who got to the mainland.

have a bigger version of that pic

Conan is a Barbarian 4/Thief 3/Fighter6
Or something around there.

I stand corrected.

Conan is skilled in so many different kinds of weapons and armor that it is expedient to say Conan is a fighter, probably dual/multiclassed as a thief.

His Rage and savage upbringing are talked about at great lengths though.

Berserker rage was never a factor in his fighting, unless you can find me a source that tells me otherwise.

That sounds about right, and it always seemed Conan rolled pretty all-around good stats to be able to pull off so many classes.

Going by his descriptions he has max physical stats, above average int (he has a talent for languages) and charisma.
Only wisdom might be considered average or slightly bellow.

A lot of heroes tend to have above-average stats in nearly every area. It has a weird relationship with the RPG ideas of game balance or stat rolling.

On the other hand, in older versions of D&D, the idea was that you rolled up characters who were just aspiring adventurers until one of them managed to survive for a while, and that character was the one who stuck. Maybe part of the reason heroes are so legendary is because of lucky rolls.

You do realize that that's some of the heaviest armor there is, right?

>are you checking out my ass?
>>n... no...
>well why the fuck not!? I've worked hard to get my ass looking that good!

But why is it an old guy, I can't self insert. Why does he ship the enchantress and that retarded templar.

Sure, if you wanna go historical there's been people that could be described as barbarians that went into battle anywhere from fully nude to what most anons would consider well armored. If you want to stick to fantasy, well who the hell cares? Your settings barbarians can go to battle in ball gowns and lace for all it actually matters.

So Conan is North African?

How about armor made of swords.

Because Originally, it was supposed to be the Diablo 2 Barbarian, who got old.

Fem Barbarian was supposed to be his Daughter. But people whined it made the Barbarian "The main character"

Not if she looks like that.

I don't see why not, though I can't see them wearing armor like a knight. Scavenged armor or armor without any shiny bits, solely practical.

Not Quite a Berserker rage, but his Barbarian heritage is often said to fuel his blows.

Alot of "These are not the wild swings of a pictish savage, nor the trained blows of the Aquilonian, Conan strikes with the Controlled Primal Fury of a great hunting cat"

Conan was compared alot to a Big Cat.

I mean it's the celts, the guys who are famous for Woad and pants only combat, are also the guys who invented Chainmail.

Not at all.

Cimmeria is probably central Germany, as the areas north are literally Proto-Vikings in the Vanir and Aesir.

I can see how that would be a problem, either come out clean and say what is supposed to be the story line, or have everyone stay equal. Not that I care about videogame dramas.

It really was a non-issue, and actually raised further problems, because Barbarians are a race in Diablo 3, and were nearly extinct.

All of the classes had their backstories, and Ironically, the Barbarian does not.

>Should barbarians be allowed to wear armor?
Well, no shit. Only a few moments after the first spear was chucked, humanity figured out that putting something between yourself and the spear helps you survive.

You can make them advanced Celt-like barbarians who straight up have chainmail, or just faggots with hides and leather. Don't underestimate thick hides, they can help you survive an arrow or a slash.

If there are barbarians in your setting who have no armor (natural or otherwise), you have a lot of explaining to do. Even fucking African tribesmen figured out how to make wooden shields at least.

>Amazon warrior that relies on personal wit and hand-crafted tools to survive
>still manages to get a terrible boobjob

Actual barbarians meant anyone who wasn't a Roman, so it's pretty meaningless.

It would be hard to do a boobjob with just stone tools, no wonder it didn't turn out great.

And considering silicone shouldn't really be a thing in that setting, her breasts are probably stuffed with the flesh of her enemies.

Yes. The only thing that separates a barbarian from a fighter is that a "barbarian" has extensive knowledge of the outdoors.

>another retard who knows nothing about anatomy assailing everyone with his shitty thoughts

I guarantee you're fat.

Actual barbarians meant anyone who isn't Greek, i.e. someone who "bar bars," or barks in some strange animal language.

Sorry, but the point still holds it's vague to the point of meaninglessness, it's basically anyone who's from a society less advanced(or that is considered less advanced) than the default. If the main society in a setting is spacefaring laser wielders the guy with a machinegun is a barbarian.

>see
He's not the Diablo 2 barb anymore?
I also always kinda figured the canon was that all the classes were there fighting together, at least in D1 and 2. That one Necromancer mentions that he's the disciple of the one from 2.

>5e handled it correctly by giving Barbarians different reasons to use either Medium armor or going unarmored.

You mean "time to use half-plate armor because that'll be higher AC anyway"?

No. The Mediterranean Sea hadn't formed yet, and the Stygians are pre-egyptians.

There's nowhere near enough porn of red sonja on the internet

i like big fat hats too.

>More or less, with its own sort of continental drift.
Howard wrote before the continental drift theory was accepted, so instead there have been all these cataclysms that have made landmasses rise and fall. It's stupid/simplistic based on what we know today about tectonic plates, but it was the "accepted" theory at the time he was writing.

It's the classic conundrum, Conan is not a barbarian in DND (or at least has very few levels of that class, I think he did what could be very generously called "rage" perhaps twice in REH stories).

I like DW's Barbarian, honestly, who at the start can perfectly well use armor and is based on being thirsty for glory, loot, violence and general larger than life desires.

Generic celtic regions (tough at that time he didn't care that much for germanic vs celtic).

Personally I link Cimmeria to Wales the most.

>cause honestly I can't see him in a kilt

You're bad at looking. Well, or you think the number of pics with her tits out and more just aren't enough, even though there are lots.

Fire and Ice was an amazing film

>Should barbarians be allowed to wear armor?
Realistic? Yes
Stylized? No

That's dumb. Just keep it simple to the books and stop trying to change it up for no reason or benefits.

They can do wear the armor if they want but they have to accept the penalties. That is what the penalties were put there for. Otherwise the book would say they can't even wear it.

And what if I mulitclass and/or make a barbarian with no agility?

Unless your useing a odd system in which case your an even bigger dumbass for not saying so.

>that picture
I want that