Post/Author/DateTime	Post
ogg205 07-31-07, 11:27 AM	Just wondering, what is your best munchkin (character built across several books and classes and illogically designed merely for the purpose of powergaming)? Post 'em as you see them. Here are mine: Well, the first of my creations is Amakiir (forgive the lack of originality with this name.). Here goes: Level 2 Ranger Level 2 Fighter Level 1 Barbarian Level 2 Wildrunner (Races of the wild) ___Prestige Level 2 Champion of Corellon (Races of the wild)___Prestige The combo for those who can't see it: I combine wild runner and barbarian rage. Because I add both strength and dex into damage due to elegant strike, this gives and awe inspiring amount of damage. My other creation: Okay, this is for Gemini Beren: Level 7 sorcerer Level 3 luckstealer (races of the wild)___Prestige Level 1 Fatespinner (complete arcana)___Prestige This one logically combo's together beautifully. For this character, I doubt any player in their right mind would even bring up the word munchkin because The two prestige classes are so closely related. This munchkin is for those of us that enjoy scrambling the rolls of the dice.
The_Shaman 07-31-07, 02:50 PM	In this case, I dare say you do not want rage but whirling frenzy. As for the second, it could hardly be called munchkin. Dude/tte, you have 7 whole sorcerer levels in there :P
Nezkrul 07-31-07, 02:56 PM	the ultimate munchkin is Pun Pun. but my own design would be cross-splatting for DMM persistent spell and nightsticks, i mean that just screams munchkin at me. I like this one a lot though, green races usually don't have awesome guys supporting them so here he is: Half-Orc with Half-Orc Paragon 3 / Orc Paragon 3 / Fighter 2 / Barbarian 2 / Frenzied Berserker 10, he's a one trick pony Leap Attackin Shocktrooper with a greatsword. Really fun when I played it.
InkBlot 07-31-07, 03:05 PM	munchkin (character built across several books and classes and illogically designed merely for the purpose of powergaming)? I take umbrage with your definition of munchkin. Being a munchkin has nothing to do with how well you can build powerful characters. A munchkin is a person with an extremely immature attitude towards the game. When you call somebody a munchkin, you're saying he or she is acting like a small child. This is where the term came from. Munchkin is often used synonymously with "small child." What you want, what you call a munchkin build, is actually an optimized or power-game build. Building an optimized character has little to do with maturity, although being able to coordinate the resources in your mind requires a certain level of intelligence and patience (which are each different from maturity, but often breed maturity in a person possessing both). There are two whole seperate forums for Optimization and Power-Game builds: Character Optimization (http://boards1.wizards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=339), for optimizing characters which will see actual play; And Theoretical Optimization (http://boards1.wizards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=330), for characters/tricks wich are designed to test the system, and not to be played in any game.
The_Shaman 07-31-07, 03:10 PM	Actually, I think a character who is specifically aiming for a super-ultra-uber character who dominates the game and gets all the goodies is probably a munchkin character. At least, that is the idea I got from the definitive work on the topic - The Munchkin Handbook :P
Tempest Stormwind 07-31-07, 03:41 PM	Actually, I think a character who is specifically aiming for a super-ultra-uber character who dominates the game and gets all the goodies is probably a munchkin character. At least, that is the idea I got from the definitive work on the topic - The Munchkin Handbook :P And I should also add that this is an immature perspective on the game since you don't bother thinking about how other players or the DM might feel. "Munchkin" is also occasionally used synonymously with "cheater". I'd like to note that people who cheat are also immature about it (not mature enough to work within the rules), and therefore are still caught in the munchkin definition. Besides, it's fully possible to play a ludicrously powerful character and NOT be a munchkin.
TrajanCavalous 08-06-07, 10:51 PM	I take umbrage with your definition of munchkin. Being a munchkin has nothing to do with how well you can build powerful characters. A munchkin is a person with an extremely immature attitude towards the game. When you call somebody a munchkin, you're saying he or she is acting like a small child. This is where the term came from. Munchkin is often used synonymously with "small child." What you want, what you call a munchkin build, is actually an optimized or power-game build. Building an optimized character has little to do with maturity, although being able to coordinate the resources in your mind requires a certain level of intelligence and patience (which are each different from maturity, but often breed maturity in a person possessing both). Interesting stuff. If it meant that once its useage, at least in some places, has changed. None of the gamers I know in the city I live in (and between immediate friends and people in the city's gaming guild I know many) use the term munchkin as a synonym for "small child." They use it as a derogatory term for stuff that is considered grossly over powered yet still RAW and people who use such material.
Jaxgaret 08-06-07, 11:39 PM	None of the gamers I know in the city I live in (and between immediate friends and people in the city's gaming guild I know many) use the term munchkin as a synonym for "small child." They use it as a derogatory term for stuff that is considered grossly over powered yet still RAW and people who use such material. Munchkin (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/munchkin). It doesn't matter if the people in your city don't use the word to mean that; it's what the word means. In the gaming community, it has taken on its own connotations. Perhaps linked to the latter definitions in the link I posted above. One can see munchkins as newbies who try to break the rules to get ahead - once one gains experience and maturity with the gaming system (and with life), they understand that the only person they are cheating is themself by breaking the rules. They realize that D&D is for having fun, not for "winning". Or they stay a munchkin.
JulesCARV 08-06-07, 11:54 PM	Illumian cloistered cleric 1/wizard 2/mystic theurge 7/dweomerkeeper 10, advancing wizard spellcasting with dweomerkeeper. Improved Sigil (krau) at level 3.
Jaxgaret 08-07-07, 12:10 AM	Illumian cloistered cleric 1/wizard 2/mystic theurge 7/dweomerkeeper 10, advancing wizard spellcasting with dweomerkeeper. Improved Sigil (krau) at level 3. Oooh, very nice. I hadn't seen that particular exploit of the Illumian sigils before :) I'll throw the standard Druid10/PlanarShepherd10 out there.
TrajanCavalous 08-07-07, 12:18 AM	It doesn't matter if the people in your city don't use the word to mean that; it's what the word means. In the gaming community, it has taken on its own connotations. Perhaps linked to the latter definitions in the link I posted above. One can see munchkins as newbies who try to break the rules to get ahead - once one gains experience and maturity with the gaming system (and with life), they understand that the only person they are cheating is themself by breaking the rules. They realize that D&D is for having fun, not for "winning". Or they stay a munchkin. ?? It would not matter only if I wanted to willfully misunderstand the gamers I'm talking to. What you meant was it doesn't matter to you. Not sure if it's your intent here but it seems there are always people on these boards who try to dictate the useage and meaning of words that are used as gamer slang. Hearing how the community is using such terms is always interesting and relevant. I've learned a lot from hearing about such cultural tidbits and that includes the definitions offered in this thread including your own. Ty for the opinion. Obviously because it means that by the dictionary definition it doesn't have to mean that by it's use as gamer slang amongst the people I know or anyone. As you said amongst the gamer community it has definitely taken on it's own connotations. I don't even think I've heard it used per the dictionary definition or the definition you give at the few GenCon I've been to but maybe I've misunderstood people. Regardless people would find it silly and I don't think many would like it if gamers were forced to use gamer slang only per the definitions in the dictionary. I think on that we agree. But it's all interesting.
penchant 08-07-07, 06:49 PM	Considering we are talking about slang to begin with, it is a bit ideosyncratic to assert that there are official defined terms that cannot evolve or expand. It is true that the term munchkin is never complimentary, different groups do use it in different terms. Mechanics gamers (like the good Tempus Stormwind) obviously equate it with cheating and gaining bonuses that are not rules legal. He has advocated this definition tirelessly and has his own permanent soap box in many people's sigs. Other people refer the term to a broader interpretation that includes gamers that create uber builds that, while rules legal, are completely illogical from a fluff standpoint or that the PC would have to go through highly unlikely contortions of culture and/or concience to achieve. The Half Orc Monk to Barbarian conversion is the simplest example. While it is possible for an orc to be raised lawful in a monastary and then achieve just the right powerlevel in monk to be useful but has a change of heart and becomes chaotic and empraces the battle rager in himself... all the while remembering the teachings of his master. While possible, its unlikely and some of the uber builds proposed on the CO (non "theoretical" boards) would require an epic level of story line just to make the jumps necessary to pick up the diverse backgrounds needed by 10th level. I think it is the latter definition that the OP refers to and the goals are not to propose cheat builds but highly unlikely builds that require strange combinations to achieve their power. Like Polymorph any object on a dwarf so he can get an elf only PrC.
Tempest Stormwind 08-07-07, 08:00 PM	Ahem. My name is TEMPEST. Not Tempus. Based off of the Latin word for "storm". "Tempus" is the Latin word for "time", and the two are only related in that "tempus" is sometimes translated as "season" (as in seasonal storms). I also object to being called a "mechanics gamer". I play the game to roleplay, just like you probably do. I just happen to remember that there's rules attached to it, and like any complex rule set (mathematics, logic, computer languages, and so on) I dive right in and figure out its little nuances. For the record, my definition of munchkin isn't necessarily a cheater. It used to be, on the odd time that I ever actually used the word (I avoided it, and still do on the most part, because it's poorly understood). Then I thought about it a bit more. It turns out that a cheater is just the most common specific presentation of this greater problem. What kind of attitude toward the game does a cheater have? An immature one. A mature player would understand that the rules are there to keep things fair between players. InkBlot got it beyond accurate. He nailed the general-case solution for what makes a munchkin a munchkin. Incidentally, I said this in my first reply to this topic, and you still think I equate munchkin to cheater? Oh, and for the record, you apparently are locked into PHB flavoring for the classes. I've used the monk class to represent anything from stock PHB wuxia-wannabes to nightmarish mutants from beyond the abyss (reversed knees for added speed and jumping distance, extra limbs for quick attacks and strong grapples, transmuting its body into rock when striking for increased unarmed damage or gas when being struck (for an AC bonus), regeneration, gills on the side preventing armor use... and so on). A monk entering barbarian really isn't that outlandish if you take five minutes to think about it. Additionally, no optimizer in his right mind would do that, since there are better ways to do whatever the goal of that character would be. Furthermore, there's nothing inherently outlandish about roughly 95% of the builds that I've seen on the CO boards, even if you stick with default flavor. Please learn a bit more on optimization before speaking of it.
arderkrag 08-07-07, 09:32 PM	An 18th level Doomfaller, a class I made myself. The purpose of this class is to make fighter who deals damage to large foes by jumping off a flying mount (you read that right) from dozens of feet in the air and is able to deal the applicable falling damage to his foe. He is also able to add his level (total level, none of this level-in-the-class BS) as a bonus to damage when performing this action. At 4th level, the character gains anti-impact to himself. At 2nd level, any damage dealt during a jump or fall of at least 10 feet is doubled for the doomfaller. Thus, at 18th level, you can deal loads of damage. I can deal this damage with an Air Genasi, if jumping from 100 feet and scoring a crit: ((3d6+37)x2 plus 10d6 falling) x2 for an average of: 328 damage.
Tempest Stormwind 08-07-07, 11:35 PM	An 18th level Doomfaller, a class I made myself. The purpose of this class is to make fighter who deals damage to large foes by jumping off a flying mount (you read that right) from dozens of feet in the air and is able to deal the applicable falling damage to his foe. He is also able to add his level (total level, none of this level-in-the-class BS) as a bonus to damage when performing this action. At 4th level, the character gains anti-impact to himself. At 2nd level, any damage dealt during a jump or fall of at least 10 feet is doubled for the doomfaller. Thus, at 18th level, you can deal loads of damage. I can deal this damage with an Air Genasi, if jumping from 100 feet and scoring a crit: ((3d6+37)x2 plus 10d6 falling) x2 for an average of: 328 damage. Um, hi. We did that already, without custom classes. (http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=5436939&postcount=104) Using a very cheap weapon for level 18 (+4 equivalent), and no other magical gear, without a critical hit, that build could end up with 319.5 damage on average, but I can also withdraw and set up for the next round's attack in the same round. If magic gear's allowed, that *skyrockets* into the thousands, easily. Oh, and there are builds inspired by that which do far, far, far more. And we did that over two years ago. Imagine what could be done *now*. You don't need custom classes. You just need to know what you can do with the game already. For that, and for most of what this thread has been asking about, you need to visit the Character Optimization forums. I would particularly like to direct you to Campaign Smashers (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=897351). I'll let it speak for itself.
TrajanCavalous 08-08-07, 12:07 AM	Tempus, I also misunderstood what you were saying in your first post.
Cold Napalm 08-08-07, 12:27 AM	Umm didn't tempest go over how his name isn't tempus a few posts back?!? Anyways my most powerful character build that I played in a real game...druid 20 (because no sane DM around here will allow planar shepherd). Followed by a DMM cleric(sadly no nightsticks). Not as powerful, but still fun is the fighter 1/wizard 6/spellsword 5/ AC 5/unseen seer 3. Spell channeling shapechange on your fighter is fun.
arderkrag 08-08-07, 10:19 AM	Um, hi. We did that already, without custom classes. (http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=5436939&postcount=104) Using a very cheap weapon for level 18 (+4 equivalent), and no other magical gear, without a critical hit, that build could end up with 319.5 damage on average, but I can also withdraw and set up for the next round's attack in the same round. If magic gear's allowed, that *skyrockets* into the thousands, easily. Oh, and there are builds inspired by that which do far, far, far more. And we did that over two years ago. Imagine what could be done *now*. You don't need custom classes. You just need to know what you can do with the game already. For that, and for most of what this thread has been asking about, you need to visit the Character Optimization forums. I would particularly like to direct you to Campaign Smashers (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=897351). I'll let it speak for itself. Yes, I have done up in the thousands as well. Plus, with my build, you get all the rest of your attacks normally.
zorgling25 08-08-07, 10:43 AM	Yes, I have done up in the thousands as well. Plus, with my build, you get all the rest of your attacks normally. Except your use of a custom class sort of makes that argument a little empty. I bet I could build a better character using the Lightning Warrior too![/sarcasm]
Tempest Stormwind 08-08-07, 11:07 AM	On an unrelated note, one of the items I was mentioning allows me to do just that, still withdrawing afterward to charge again the following round. All published WotC material.
JulesCARV 08-08-07, 02:43 PM	Alright: Venerable Kobold cloistered cleric of Kurtulmak 20 Domains: Knowledge, Kobold, and Trickery Feats: Dragonwrought, Craft Wondrous Item, Extra Turning, Craft Rod, Extend Spell, Persistent Spell, Divine Metamagic (Persistent Spell) Strengths: Finds traps, plenty of skills, able item creator, full cleric spellcasting. After level 18, also okay (if not great) in battle (monk's belt, bracers of armor, persistent divine power, divine favor, and righteous might, etc. (Persistent righteous might negates kobold physical penalties, and isn't too inconventient if you're small!)) Weaknesses: Doesn't really get the persistent DMM stuff until level 18. Also, because deity is kurtulmak, gets the rebuke undead/inflict wounds combo instead of the turn undead/cure wounds combo. Since rebukings go to DMM, and turnings are just as good as rebukings for that purpose, but not having spontaneous curative magic sucks. Are there any good or neutral kobold deities?
penchant 08-08-07, 04:10 PM	Ahem. My name is TEMPEST. Not Tempus. Based off of the Latin word for "storm". "Tempus" is the Latin word for "time", and the two are only related in that "tempus" is sometimes translated as "season" (as in seasonal storms). I do apologize for getting your name wrong, It was late and I type slower than I think. A Tempest is a storm in english too. I also object to being called a "mechanics gamer". I play the game to roleplay, just like you probably do. I just happen to remember that there's rules attached to it, and like any complex rule set (mathematics, logic, computer languages, and so on) I dive right in and figure out its little nuances. I am sure you role play as well as anyone, however I have only seen your posts in connection with game mechanics and you seem to be regarded as an authority on mechanics and optimization. That is your rep here, unless I never go where you talk about your RP experiences. For the record, my definition of munchkin isn't necessarily a cheater. It used to be, on the odd time that I ever actually used the word (I avoided it, and still do on the most part, because it's poorly understood). Then I thought about it a bit more. It turns out that a cheater is just the most common specific presentation of this greater problem. What kind of attitude toward the game does a cheater have? An immature one. A mature player would understand that the rules are there to keep things fair between players. This is true. Immature players can also abuse the rules to gain unfair advantage over other players which was point two of mine. Its just that you had used cheater as an example of immature in the previous post. And you frequently sound of on the issues of munchinry, roleplaying and rollplaying. InkBlot got it beyond accurate. He nailed the general-case solution for what makes a munchkin a munchkin. Incidentally, I said this in my first reply to this topic, and you still think I equate munchkin to cheater? No, I think you equate cheater to munchkin. Oh, and for the record, you apparently are locked into PHB flavoring for the classes. I've used the monk class to represent anything from stock PHB wuxia-wannabes to nightmarish mutants from beyond the abyss (reversed knees for added speed and jumping distance, extra limbs for quick attacks and strong grapples, transmuting its body into rock when striking for increased unarmed damage or gas when being struck (for an AC bonus), regeneration, gills on the side preventing armor use... and so on). A monk entering barbarian really isn't that outlandish if you take five minutes to think about it. No, I have been a frequent advocate of fluff swapping to achieve a result, and when you do so that is not the softer side of munchkin, especially when done by or in conjunction with the DM. However, completely dropping any pretense of fluff, detail or other color that goes with a class simply in order to accomplish an optimization goal is what I was talking about. I was not talking about reflavoring a class to fit a campaign, but bleaching a class of flavor to fit a character sheet. Monk entering barbarian has a requisite alignment change, so it better take more than five minutes for a character to think about it. Additionally, no optimizer in his right mind would do that, since there are better ways to do whatever the goal of that character would be. Furthermore, there's nothing inherently outlandish about roughly 95% of the builds that I've seen on the CO boards, even if you stick with default flavor. Please learn a bit more on optimization before speaking of it. And I said "Some of the examples on the CO boards", and by your 95% outlandishness free standard, I seem to be correct. You know you've seen a build and just rolled your eyes at it. Sure most of the builds combine similarly flavored classes and features along with reasonable races and templates. We aren't talking about all optimized builds and never were. We are talking about legal munckinry. Well, I guess I'm just an ignorant jackanape. Far be it from me to express a valid opinion. And I wasn't propounding on optimization, but munckiness which everyone has experience with at least once in their gaming careers.
Tempest Stormwind 08-08-07, 04:36 PM	Penchant: If I don't quote-and-reply, I don't have anything to add, mostly because I'm in agreement. I am sure you role play as well as anyone, however I have only seen your posts in connection with game mechanics and you seem to be regarded as an authority on mechanics and optimization. That is your rep here, unless I never go where you talk about your RP experiences. That is because communication requires common ground. No one in this thread plays in any of my games. Thus, the RP components of my games have no common territory with anyone here. Meanwhile, we all read the same rulebooks, so presumably we all know the same rules. I thus discuss rules here. This might explain the misconception. No, I think you equate cheater to munchkin. Ah, that was *my* problem, then, in mixing up the order of your claim. I apologize. No, I have been a frequent advocate of fluff swapping to achieve a result, and when you do so that is not the softer side of munchkin, especially when done by or in conjunction with the DM. However, completely dropping any pretense of fluff, detail or other color that goes with a class simply in order to accomplish an optimization goal is what I was talking about. I was not talking about reflavoring a class to fit a campaign, but bleaching a class of flavor to fit a character sheet. Monk entering barbarian has a requisite alignment change, so it better take more than five minutes for a character to think about it. I look at monk and see disparate abilities, based around simple unarmed combat and multiple attacks at the lower levels. I look at barbarian and I see a skirmisher, quick movement and furious strikes on the early levels. Thus, I can see a barbarian/monk working if, say, you have a drunken-master-style approach to martial arts. Another possible option is to view the barbarian's rage as centering yourself (recall the boosted Will saves, plus the mind-over-matter flavor of HP and so on, plus the yogi who insists all he's doing is ignoring his body telling him he can't) and abandoning the "self" -- subjugating your higher consciousness away, removing all emotion whatsoever except that required to turn you into a cold, unfeeling killing machine. Because this naturally involves removing all conscious control (fluffwise), you probably shouldn't be thinking of it in terms of discipline -- thus, a person with a rigidly disciplined (i.e. lawful in the context of monk requirements) mind would have trouble undertaking such a technique. Multiple fluff reasons for a monk to enter barbarian. Some even explain the alignment movement. The others work the way I work when I DM -- alignment is *gone*. (Incidentally, a boatload of arguments go with it.) The barbarian's alignment restriction dates from the original Unearthed Arcana when alignment was more rigidly fixed. The monk's alignment restriction was put in there to placate playtesters. There's no mechanical or fluff reason to restrict them as such.
ToastedAmphibian 08-08-07, 04:42 PM	HEY! I came here to read about munchknig builds, not listen to peopel bicker over there FEELINGS about the word munchkin! I dont have any builds to contribute, as ive been playing only every other sunday for less than a year. If YOU have a build to contribute, please do so. If you dont, please take the bickering eslewhere and let this thread die. Thank you :}
RobTzu 08-08-07, 05:09 PM	If you have more than one prestige class, you are a munchkin. WotC has a case of schizophrenia on the issue. Their business model is clearly to sell books, which always includes more prestige classes. Their rule set says: We encourage you, as the DM, to tightly limit the prestige classes available in your campaign. It seems that in most campaigns, there is nothing prestigious about prestige classes.
Jaxgaret 08-08-07, 05:46 PM	If you have more than one prestige class, you are a munchkin. Excuse me? If you want to play that way in your campaign, fine. Don't bring your narrow viewpoint here and bandy about insults because of it.
zorgling25 08-08-07, 07:23 PM	HEY! I came here to read about munchknig builds, not listen to peopel bicker over there FEELINGS about the word munchkin! I dont have any builds to contribute, as ive been playing only every other sunday for less than a year. If YOU have a build to contribute, please do so. If you dont, please take the bickering eslewhere and let this thread die. Thank you :} Ignoring the negative connotations of the word munchkin, the reason there have been relatively few builds posted here is probably because there's no point in reposting any one of thousands of character buiilds on the Character Optimization board.
Roland_of_the_Eld 08-08-07, 09:46 PM	In this case, I dare say you do not want rage but whirling frenzy. Not to take things off topic (irony?), but I've been looking for "Frenzy," and ability that is mentioned in Races of the Wild, Complete Warrior, etc. Is this what they are talking about, and, if so, where is it?
Jaxgaret 08-08-07, 09:54 PM	Not to take things off topic (irony?), but I've been looking for "Frenzy," and ability that is mentioned in Races of the Wild, Complete Warrior, etc. Is this what they are talking about, and, if so, where is it? Frenzy is an ability of the Frenzied Berserker, from Complete Warrior. Whirling Frenzy (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/classFeatureVariants.htm#rageVariantWhir lingFrenzy) is a variant ability for the Barbarian.
Roland_of_the_Eld 08-08-07, 10:03 PM	Right, but any of the feats that mention frenzy as a prerequisite say "rage or frenzy." How is it possible to have frenzy without rage?
zorgling25 08-08-07, 10:09 PM	Right, but any of the feats that mention frenzy as a prerequisite say "rage or frenzy." How is it possible to have frenzy without rage? Ex-Barbarians lose the ability to rage. I forget if FB has an alignment restriction, but if not, this is why.
Jaxgaret 08-08-07, 10:21 PM	Right, but any of the feats that mention frenzy as a prerequisite say "rage or frenzy." How is it possible to have frenzy without rage? WotC isn't always perfect when it comes to their wording on feats and such. Sometimes the wording is downright horrible, actually. It's also possible that they wrote "Prerequisite: Ability to Rage or Frenzy" to cover all the bases - just in case they missed something.
zorgling25 08-08-07, 11:14 PM	WotC isn't always perfect when it comes to their wording on feats and such. Sometimes the wording is downright horrible, actually. It's also possible that they wrote "Prerequisite: Ability to Rage or Frenzy" to cover all the bases - just in case they missed something. I can see a reason now: Barbarians can't be neutral, Frenzied Berserkers can. A neutral Barbarian/FB loses Rage, but retains Frenzy, meaning he still qualifies for Frenzy or Rage PrCs.
runestar 08-08-07, 11:22 PM	It is not impossible that some future prc or barb substitution feature might grant frenzy without rage. In that case, it might simply be some sort of catch-all.
Tempest Stormwind 08-08-07, 11:35 PM	I can see a reason now: Barbarians can't be neutral, Frenzied Berserkers can. A neutral Barbarian/FB loses Rage, but retains Frenzy, meaning he still qualifies for Frenzy or Rage PrCs. Barbarians have "any nonlawful" and lose their rage if they become lawful. Neutral is just fine.
Fallenangel359 08-09-07, 01:15 AM	I'm playing a character that started as a L8 with 6 different classes from 4 different books, including PHB, magic of incarnum, tome of battle, and oriental adventures samurai 2, fighter 1, sohei 1, totemist 2, warblade 1, iaijutsu master 1
RobTzu 08-09-07, 03:12 AM	Excuse me? If you want to play that way in your campaign, fine. Don't bring your narrow viewpoint here and bandy about insults because of it. Methinks the lady doth protest too much. I applied no negative connation to the word "munchkin". You may have taken insult, but none was given. It is like the saying: "If you call a rocket scientist stupid he will just laugh, but call an idiot stupid and he will get mad." It is not an unreasonable thing to try to pin down what munchkin means in a thread that asks for examples of it.
The_Shaman 08-09-07, 03:19 AM	Right, but any of the feats that mention frenzy as a prerequisite say "rage or frenzy." How is it possible to have frenzy without rage? OA sohei, OA singh rager, RotW Wildrunner (IMO, I'd say most feats would apply) and probably other classes all have similar abilities. The Sohei's is even called Ki Frenzy.
JulesCARV 08-09-07, 03:33 AM	A few more: -Artificer with wand surge, persistent spell, staff of unfettered heroism, and a selection of spell-trigger items. -A warforged ardent 5/metamind 10 with practiced manifester, expanded knowledge (temporal reiteration), and expanded knowledge (bestow power), and fellow psionicists (psychic warriors, psions, etc) in the party who can actually do stuff with their power points.