I think that soon the Barbarian page must be split in three pages, because I consider Diablo I Barbarian, Diablo II Barbarian and Diablo III Barbarian as completely different. The same with their skills. I tend to use disambig pages when a word has two different meanings or can be used in different contexts. What do you think? Hans Kamp 19:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, sure. But the Diablo I Barb article will not have much info. And the templates will require a hell lotta work. But yeah, we need only the Barbarian for these. There's some trivia. The barb's the only character in all three games. Cheers from the Mobokill 20:05, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
- I must soften the tone above a bit. In the gameplay the three Barbarians might be totally different, but that difference might well be absent if you talk about the lore behind the Barbarian classes. Hans Kamp 22:10, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Malah knows the Barbarian from his pre-Diablo II days, and apparently he and her son had a falling out of some kind. Should this info be put into the article? Brainwasher5 (talk) 15:34, October 10, 2013 (UTC)
- In theory, but it would need a general lore background section or something.
- In actual fact, I've wondered how to approach the D2 characters from a story sense, given that they've been mentioned outside the game itself. Unfortunately, while we've got Aidan, Blood Raven, and The Summoner for the original heroes, only the sorceress has a canonical name so far. I've wondered if there should be separate character pages for them such as "Amazon (Character)" or in this case, "Barbarian (Diablo II Character)." But as the article stands, it can probably be slotted in at the start or in a trivia section.--Hawki (talk) 20:51, October 10, 2013 (UTC)
- I'll add it to a Trivia section then. Brainwasher5 (talk) 02:41, October 11, 2013 (UTC)