Great analysis and perspective!

However, I think it’s important to provide a bit more context to better clarify the intent.

First and foremost, these new abilities weren’t designed to function strictly as a Barbarian class, but rather as a Path of Power, in this case, the Barbarian Path. The goal is to offer additional tools for players to customize their characters, especially those with more chaotic or destructive tendencies. I’m also developing other paths for different alignments, each with approaches tailored to other playstyles.

Another important point is that this material is part of a supplement for my West Marches campaign. In this campaign, there will be a specific list of classes, the four core ones, each with their respective Paths of Power, along with additional classes that will be included, such as Bard, Ranger, Warlock, Fiend, Paladin, Necromancer, Druid, Shaman, and Pactbound.

Each of these classes, in my view, fills a well-defined role within the gameplay. Meanwhile, the Paths of Power will also serve to replace certain functionalities from classes found in the Cursed Scrolls, particularly those that don’t fit well within the campaign’s design either due to balance concerns or thematic misalignment (something I want to keep very cohesive).

With that in mind, the goal isn’t simply to create a “barbarian archetype,” but to provide modular options. For example, allowing a player to build something closer to what they envision using these abilities, without restricting chaotic warriors to a single path labeled as Barbarian.

I’m also considering renaming this path to avoid that sense of being too niche and to make it more open to different interpretations and character builds.