Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Keenath 03-04-05, 10:55 AM	In an upcoming Eberron game, I'm going to be playing a Shifter barbarian. Now, I'd like to write up an urban barbarian -- a backstreet brawler, raised in the lower levels of Sharn (or other large city), fending for himself and so on. My question is what changes I should make to the Barbarian base class to make it urban. The DM has agreed to discuss the matter with me. My first thought is class skills. I think I'd probably want to throw out Survival in favor of Knowledge (Local). This represents knowing how to survive in a city rather than in the wild -- knowing where to find a fence, how to get in contact with the underworld, and who you can (or can't) trust. It's street-smarts instead of wilderness-smarts. Second, Ride and Handle Animal seem bizarre for somebody who, basically, doesn't deal with animals outside of rats and draft beasts. So... what should I do with that? I'm thinking, perhaps, of adding Diplomacy or Bluff -- Handle People as opposed to Handle Animals, I guess -- and a replacement for Ride could be Gather Information, just on the same theme of skills you need to survive in the gritty alleyways of the big city. That's about it for skills... I really want to get Gather Info and Know(Local), because I feel that those are critical skills for an city dweller, particularly one living on the margin of legality. Diplomacy or Bluff would be nice, but not really necessary. As far as class features, I'm considering trying to get something other than Trap Sense. I don't see how it applies to a city-dweller so much. But that's a pretty small thing; I'm just looking for some ways to improve the "city" flavor. Any suggestions? Or should I leave the class features alone? Here are some ideas that pop to mind for replacing Trap Sense (meaning you get the same numerical bonus but on a different condition). Some of these aren't strong enough on their own, and you'd have to select two of them together... - A bonus to Initiative checks, following the same concept of a highly-developed 'danger sense'. - A bonus to Spot checks, helping him be more aware of attackers. - A bonus to Sense Motive to avoid being bluffed in combat - A bonus to avoid being tripped in combat The last two might represent special training or techniques developed to deal with more agile fighters, though I'm not sure it's kosher to have class abilities that specifically target another class's abilities (ie, bard/rogue). Particularly when I already get flanking protection against those irritating rogues...
Cymraegmorgan 03-04-05, 01:36 PM	First off, Survival is survival, irrespective of environment. keep it. Replace Handle Animal and Ride with Knowledge(local) and Gather Information. Leave all the rest as is. Trap Sense makes more sense in the gutters of a large city than it does in the wild....
Keenath 03-04-05, 01:54 PM	Um, Survival says in its blurb... You can keep yourself and others safe and fed in the wild. That doesn't sound like "regardless of environment" to me.
Cymraegmorgan 03-04-05, 03:16 PM	Um, Survival says in its blurb... That doesn't sound like "regardless of environment" to me. If you had ever been to Desire in New Orleans, or Hell's Kitchen, you would regard such an environment as "wild". "Wild" can have many connotations, and those good at surviving off of nothing can do it in an Arctic waste, a steamng jungle, primeval forest, the steppes, or the back alleys of Fleet.
Candide 03-04-05, 03:44 PM	Races of Destiny has talked about the "survival" think. you can expand it to cities and what not I believe
Dur6! 03-04-05, 03:46 PM	If you had ever been to Desire in New Orleans, or Hell's Kitchen, you would regard such an environment as "wild". "Wild" can have many connotations, and those good at surviving off of nothing can do it in an Arctic waste, a steamng jungle, primeval forest, the steppes, or the back alleys of Fleet. I am just wondering, are you deliberately taking the definition of wild out of context? I think in this case survival is referring to the wilderness of the outdoors as opposed to the dangerous back alleys of a metropolitan city. Anyways, depending on what your dm says you can use knowledge local to know safe spots, good areas where you can get a cheap meal, or if you were really desperate, scrounge food outside of inns and taverns.
Keenath 03-04-05, 04:21 PM	Well, considering the actual uses of survival, it doesn't apply much in a city. 1) Foraging for food and water while travelling at half your overland speed. Travelling speed isn't really an issue in a city, and hunting isn't an option in most cases. 2) Fortitude bonus against bad weather. Um, how about *go inside*. 3) Keep from getting lost and avoid natural hazards such as quicksand. Getting lost in a city is possible, yes, but even the potholes in the parking lot at work don't qualify as quicksand. 4) Predict the weather Useful, but not particularly an urban survival skill. 5) Follow tracks This is the only good use, and you need a feat to use it. And if you go with some of the splatbooks, you should use Gather Info to do this in a city anyway. Survival is, by its blurb and its uses, quite obviously "in the wilderness" and not a city-dweller skill at all.
Cymraegmorgan 03-04-05, 05:12 PM	I am just wondering, are you deliberately taking the definition of wild out of context? I think in this case survival is referring to the wilderness of the outdoors as opposed to the dangerous back alleys of a metropolitan city. Anyways, depending on what your dm says you can use knowledge local to know safe spots, good areas where you can get a cheap meal, or if you were really desperate, scrounge food outside of inns and taverns. The same set of instincts and skills that allow one to survive in the natural jungle are used to "survive" in the urban jungle. Note the success of early Transportees from the backalleys of London who were shipped to the wilds of Georgia and the Carolinas. Survival is survival....but I already said that.
Keenath 03-04-05, 09:59 PM	You're using the real-world definition of "survival", which the skill doesn't reflect. I just did and exhaustive list of what Survival skill can do in the game, and showed that none of it -- besides one minor note about tracking -- has anything to do with surviving in a city of a million people. Knowledge of the city and how to find the information you need, however, are survival skills.
RPM33 03-07-05, 11:42 PM	Congratulations Keenath! You have effectively reinvented the wheel :) The character you describe is the very definition of the classic thief archtype. I should think the choice of "base class" for an urban survivalist an obvious one.:rolleyes: I can't help but wonder about your motivation in looking to so excessively modify a class that is fundamentally and diametrically opposed to your stated design goal. If you are looking toward creating a street tough or fortified thief you could simple include a few fighter levels, relying on your thief background for street smarts, urban survival, evasion, and manipulation. If, on the other hand, certain aspects of the barbarian class are particularly attractive, choose a barbarian and save your dm from jumping needlessly through hoops to satisfy your urge to powergame. :mad:
scwolf 03-07-05, 11:47 PM	Congratulations The character you describe is the very definition of the classic thief archtype. Except for the raging, and the big honkin' hit dice, which fall well outside the classic thief type but are very fitting for a "backstreet brawler" type, like the original poster is looking for.
RPM33 03-08-05, 12:18 AM	I fail to see anywhere the original poster explicitely identified "raging, and the big honkin' hit dice" as a design criterion. Rather, his laundry list of "must haves" focus on urban survival, gathering information and "handling" people. In fact, his only mention of fighting prowess is in the context of specifically countering flanking attacks from "irritating rogues". Hardly the time to blow your stack and go berserk. Wouldn't you agree? If high hit dice and the battle rage to burn through them is an implicit element of this design, than the original poster has done an excellent job in masking his intentions. Cuz, he has spent a goodly amount of time and effort outlining a character described by the pbh in great detail about twenty pages or so after the barbarian.
scwolf 03-08-05, 01:21 AM	I fail to see anywhere the original poster explicitely identified "raging, and the big honkin' hit dice" as a design criterion. It's not explicit, but since they said they wanted to play a shifter Barbarian, then proceded to list class features of Barbarian that didn't fit their view of what an urbanized version of the Barbarian class would have. They didn't list any of the things that make a Barbarian particularly good at dishing out and soaking up large amounts of damage in melee combat (i.e. rage, d12 hit die). In particular, it's those melee combat abilities that would diferentiate a Barbarian character trying to fit the stated role of "Backstreet Brawler" over other 20-Level classes such as Fighter, or Unearthed Arcana's Thug (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=377954) trying to fit the same role, I think it's safe to say that that's why the original poster is looking for an urbanized barbarian variant in the first place.
Keenath 03-08-05, 12:38 PM	Thank you, SCWolf. You've understood the point of what I'm doing, where RPM seems confused. I thought that saying "I want to be a barbarian, except..." would automatically imply that I want all the barbarian class features and such. Big hit die, Full BAB, Rage, and so on. I didn't think I had to SAY that, I just specified the things I was thinking about changing, and later I actually whittled that down to just two class skill changes. The changes are not 'powergaming' as you suggest -- just minor modification to make the class more city-friendly. Cross-class skils would represent a transplanted wilderness barbarian who never HAD to deal with people much, trying to learn. This is more about a guy who grew up doing it, so he's going to be better than his wild cousin. SC is exactly right -- a rogue doesn't fit the concept of a brawler because he can't do what a brawler does. Fighter is closer, but a fighter's big thing is becoming tactically proficient -- having lots of 'tricks' they can perform, like Cleave, Spring Attack, or Improved Trip. A barbarian has his own special way, which is to be bigger and tougher than you, and beat you down while taking a beating. A rogue's way is the opposite, being strategic on the placement of his attacks, and trying not to be obvious when getting in position. Where does a big brawler come upon Sneak Attacks? He's just gonna bust you over the head, not aim for a vital spot. The flanking protection I mention is one the Barbarian's existing class abilities -- Uncanny Dodge. I was just musing about trap-sense variants -- which are unnecessary, as was pointed out -- and commenting that a trapsense variant that particularly targetted agile fighters would be a pain for rogues, given that I'm already unflankable due to other Barbarian class features.
RPM33 03-08-05, 02:25 PM	[QUOTE=Keenath]Thank you, SCWolf. You've understood the point of what I'm doing, where RPM seems confused. No, I get it. You want to extract all the powerful combat aspects of the most powerful fighting class, and replace any inconvenient design elements with thief aspects. The problem here is that those self same inconvenient design elements are the very reason the barbarian is so potent a class. "The changes are not 'powergaming' as you suggest -- just minor modification to make the class more city-friendly." Agian, there are obvious choices that more accurately fit the description of the character you have outlined. It would require little more than some creative thought to effectively tailor a fighter/thief combo match your needs. The fact that you are aware of this and consciously choose to look elsewhere shows that your primary interest in this design has nothing to do with role playing, but rather, everything to do with barbarian combat power. Sacrificing design integrity to maximize on combat power is exactly what powergamming is all about. This is what I took umbrage with in your original post. Your DM has plenty of legitimate things to spend time on in just bringing a game to the table. "SC is exactly right -- a rogue doesn't fit the concept of a brawler because he can't do what a brawler does. Fighter is closer, but a fighter's big thing is becoming tactically proficient -- having lots of 'tricks' they can perform, like Cleave, Spring Attack, or Improved Trip." The barbarian chooses feats from the SAME list as a generic fighter. You are not forced to make a "tricky" fighter, simply choose feats appropriate for the character. If you were a barbarian, the complication will arise from eliminating feats you ARE forced to take. Again, with rogue, develop only the skills appropriate for your character, you are not forced to develop skills you do not need. No one is suggesting you divide the levels evenly. This is a ROLE playing game for a reason. "A barbarian has his own way"...different from a fighter A barbarian IS a fighter. The difference is hit dice and rage. If you are willing to sacrifice all your other design elements for these two attributes, well then, munch on. "A rogue's way is the opposite, being strategic on the placement of his attacks, and trying not to be obvious when getting in position." No one decides how your character acts but you. "Where does a big brawler come upon Sneak Attacks? He's just gonna bust you over the head, not aim for a vital spot." Come on, a character that spent his entire life on the streets is not gonna bushwack you when he has a chance? I can definitely picture a street tough bashing someones noggin in from behind. It doesn't have to be about precision strikes to microscopic targets, just vulnerable areas. Head, kidney, throat, knee-obvious weak spots that an insightful city predator would look to exploit. "The flanking protection I mention is one the Barbarian's existing class abilities -- Uncanny Dodge. " My bad "I was just musing about trap-sense variants -- which are unnecessary, as was pointed out --" It makes sense that someone living on the streets would have some knowledge of identifying and possibly neutralizing common traps and security measures. I imagine city toughs facing similar circumstances and living in close proximity will share survival strategies. Deactivating a trap to break into a warehouse containg food/shelter on a rainy night definitely sounds like an effective urban survival strategy. Wouldn't you agree? RPM
Greg K 03-08-05, 02:33 PM	I posted an urban barbarian in the unearthed arcana section of Andy Collins discussion boards under my Aelfbeorn screename. The site www.andycollins.net. (http://www.andycollins.net)
scwolf 03-08-05, 04:07 PM	Your DM has plenty of legitimate things to spend time on in just bringing a game to the table. It's my opinion that what Keenath is asking for here is a reasonable request that falls under the guidelines spelled out in the "Modifying Character Classes" section on p.174 of the 3.5 DMG. Sure, the Keenath wants to give urban skills to the combat monster barbarian class, but given the limited number of skill points a barbarian gets per level (something that hasn't been listed on the "things I'd like to see changed list" by the way), this "urbanized" barbarian would still be at a big disadvantge in that department, compared to the rogue. When you add on barbarian illiteracy (something else that's not on the "change this" list) it becomes pretty clear that the intended character is not just a rogue that's been twinked into combat-monsterness.
Keenath 03-08-05, 05:01 PM	No, I get it. You want to extract all the powerful combat aspects of the most powerful fighting class, and replace any inconvenient design elements with thief aspects. The problem here is that those self same inconvenient design elements are the very reason the barbarian is so potent a class. I'm not sure why you continually refer to "Gather Information" as a Thief aspect, since it's as much Bard as Rogue. And I haven't replaced "any inconvenient design elements". I'm replacing a skill with its urban equivalent. As a matter of fact, I'm actually replacing the same skill -- Survival with GI -- as the Urban Ranger from UA does. The other skill I wanted was Knowledge Local, which is on the rogue list, yes -- but I didn't know that until I looked it up. It's also on the Bard and Wizard list. I never picked these skills with an eye towards effectiveness in the game -- I picked them because I think it makes sense for the character to have these abilities. I resent being referred to as a munchkin because I want to change a skill. I didn't try to get rid of illiteracy, though I could've made a strong argument for a city dweller to have learned to read. I like the uneducated aspect, actually. I didn't try to get more skill points. I'm going to be spread thin in skills already, so it isn't as though I'm going to overshadow the Face in terms of GI. Agian, there are obvious choices that more accurately fit the description of the character you have outlined. It would require little more than some creative thought to effectively tailor a fighter/thief combo match your needs. The fact that you are aware of this and consciously choose to look elsewhere shows that your primary interest in this design has nothing to do with role playing, but rather, everything to do with barbarian combat power. What does Gather Info have to do with boosting my Barbarian combat prowess? :confused: As a seconary complaint, I'm not sure if you noticed this or not, but Rogues get Lots and Lots of skill points, which the barbarian does not. He's relatively unskilled, though he may have put some effort into learning to talk to people. And Barbarians rage; that's the basis of the class and their primary ability. Sacrificing design integrity to maximize on combat power is exactly what powergamming is all about. This is what I took umbrage with in your original post. Your DM has plenty of legitimate things to spend time on in just bringing a game to the table. Again, :confused: ... After I described my character concept, my DM came to me (!) and told me to talk to him at the next session and we could discuss any changes to the class to make it fit in a city. That's what triggered the thread -- I was brainstorming and wanted some opinions on my thoughts. And what I got was, in large part, a screaming fit over anyone who would dare to make the smallest of changes to a base class... The barbarian chooses feats from the SAME list as a generic fighter. You are not forced to make a "tricky" fighter, simply choose feats appropriate for the character... No one is suggesting you divide the levels evenly. This is a ROLE playing game for a reason. Well, the comment on dividing levels evenly comes from the fact that Shifters have a favored class of Ranger, so I either keep an even split of Barbarian and Rogue, or I end up with an XP penalty. I didn't say a fighter has to be "tricky". I said a fighter has a set of tricks, that is, feats. That's his class power. A fighter, by the nature of his class abilities, is going to build towards having a set of combat tricks he can use, like Disarming or so on. Being really good with a particular weapon is also a trick; it represents having learned some very special manuvers that allow you to maximize the damage output of the blade. Certainly, a barbarian can pick the same feats, but nowhere near as many. A barbarian gets seven feats, like everyone else, but no bonus feats. He'll have combat powers, surely, but nothing as specialized or improved as a fighter's. It's a very different style of combat, and while you can play against type, the class still encourages a particular type. Why would you build a barbarian who sneaks through the shadows and leaps out to deliver one blow, then run away? You're wasting the advantage of your big hit die. Which leads to your next comment... A barbarian IS a fighter. The difference is hit dice and rage. If you are willing to sacrifice all your other design elements for these two attributes, well then, munch on. "All the other design elements"? :confused: Er... Did I mention I only want to trade two class skills, neither of which is particularly powerful? Come on, a character that spent his entire life on the streets is not gonna bushwack you when he has a chance? I can definitely picture a street tough bashing someones noggin in from behind. Of course. But he doesn't necessarily spend great amounts of time training himself to carefully strike critical points whenever his target is distracted. That's the difference between 'flatfooted' and 'sneak attack'. "I was just musing about trap-sense variants -- which are unnecessary, as was pointed out --" It makes sense that someone living on the streets would have some knowledge of identifying and possibly neutralizing common traps and security measures. I imagine city toughs ... Wouldn't you agree? Yes, I do agree. Read what I wrote, and what you quoted of me. "variants which are unnecessary, as was pointed out". I had been thinking in terms of snares and pits, but somebody pointed out that cities are more trapped than the woods, and I agreed, and withdrew trapsense from the list of changes I'm considering.
Hodo 03-08-05, 06:21 PM	I'll side with RPM here in regards to the fact that your character concept could be nicely fulfilled with a rogue/fighter build. When I think of a "brawler" or "thug" character, that's the combination that instantly springs to mind. As a 3rd party observing, I've found RPM to be pretty polite (albiet a bit blunt) in his posts. What you are doing is taking the Barbarian- a class whose only real disadvantage is poor dealings in social/urbanized situations- and removing that shortcomming, if not making your character somewhat more specialized at it. You want a character that's built like a brick all. He has ungodly strength and endurance and has spent his entire life fighting against Pelor knows what in the slums of a city. Whenever he fights, he flies into a crazed rage, where he's impossible to stop. He's illiterate. All his other skills involve climbing, swimming, jumping, watching out for people who want to hurt him, and scaring the crap out of other people when they threaten him. Yet, when he wants to get sensitive information, he becomes a smooth talking detective; buying people drinks, chatting up random locals, and using his looks, charm, and wit to get people to trust and confide in him? That's pretty much the description of gather information. Bluff and dimplomacy are both charisma based as well. I'd think he'd use his intimidate, which is a Barbarian class skill where you can replace the charisma modifier with strength if it's high enough. If he wants to be able to find a place to rest his head for the night or know where the best spots to get some food are, I'd say a survival(urban) would work. You may not know that the innkeeper at the Flaming Wizard has a daughter named Margarette, or that the Crowing Rooster is where the Blackknife bandit's guild meets every week, but you do know that if you need a bite to eat or place to crash, that these are the places to go. Finding thi stuff should be second nature and based more on your ability to survive, than your ability to pry information out of people (you can't even read street/tavern/wanted/jobposting signs for yourself). Sounds like a confused character concept to me. Why can't he be a Barbarian with poor people skills in an urban enviroment? Also, i don't understand how you could be concerned about playign against type. You're a Barbarian who grew up in the city man! Barbarians are tough because they've been out in the wilderness killing big animals with clubs and axes, and living a semi-nomadic lifestyle in all manner of weather and intense conditions. Still, your character has high BAB, HP, Damage reduction, and Rage abilities. I knew life on the streets was tough, but I didn't knew it could produce guys like this. ........................................ ............ Your rogue/fighter could be a back alley brawler. You lose the high BAB, but you maintain a very good one by mixing the Rogue's 3/4 and fighter's full progression. When dealing with a Rogue's sneak attack, pretend you acted before your opponent, or he was just caught off gaurd so you manage to easily nail him with a punch to the throat or a nice uppercut. Maybe you shanked him in the ribcage. Maybe you just got lucky with all your wild punches and slugged him good when he wasn't able to move fast enough. Still plenty gritty and raw, but not necesarily practiced as a science, hence your substandard progression compared to a Rogue. Fighter bonus feats don't have to be spent on weapon gimmicks. You can take toughness and improve your HP. Endurance and Die hard will keep you alive when others would be dead. Feats related to unarmed combat and grappling would be good for a brawler. Dodge or other mobility feats can keep you from geting hit in the first place. Levels in rogue means that you're naturally skillful in the art of surviving, especially in metropolitan areas. You have acces to a a variety of skills, so you can pick and choose which ones you want. Since many charisma based skills are already rogue classes, and you can actually read to some degree, you have an explenation as to how you can get local information out of total strangers. Levels in fighter mean you know how to fight when it comes down to it, and you do it better than a lot of other people. You also get uncanny dodge as a rogue, albiet at a later level. If XP is bugging you, surely you can ask your DM to allow you to change your character's favored class this one time to Fighter or Rogue (like he was going to modify the Barbarian class). Both of those are fairly close to the concept of the Ranger anyway.
Keenath 03-08-05, 11:44 PM	As a 3rd party observing, I've found RPM to be pretty polite (albiet a bit blunt) in his posts.Well, like I say... it's fairly insulting to have 'munchkin' and 'powergamer' spring so easily into his posts, and on top of that I'm accused of lacking 'creative thought' and wasting my DM's time. So, yah, I'm gonna be somewhat ticked off. Your post is entirely polite, and you make some good points. I'm considering what you said about suddenly turning into a 'smooth talker' when chatting up the locals. I don't know if that is really accurate for GI, though. Obviously you can build a character -- even a rogue -- that stinks at all CHA based skills, but is a master of information gathering. What does that represent in-game? I think somebody who is skilled at GI and nothing else of interaction would be somebody who is a good listener, who can draw out another person without being particularly convincing, as a high Bluff or Diplomacy would. Maybe it's just somebody who is quiet, and good at steering the conversation. Alternatively, maybe it's just somebody who knows how to use sex appeal, for instance. A pretty girl can get guys to say a lot more than they meant to, after all. My other thought is that getting the information is often more a matter of who you ask and what you ask, rather than how you ask. Having an intuition about who has the real info doesn't make you a good speaker, or a convincing liar. You mentioned that social interaction has always been the barbarian's weakness. I don't know about that... I always figured the barbarian's weakness is the fact that he is, after all, a meat shield. He's the front line, but not the one who casts the spells that makes the peoples fall down. I desperately do not want to be relegated, as so many meat shields are, to the guy that sits up and plays during a battle, then pushes his chair back and might as well leave the room while everyone else handles the RP! Do you have the same complaints about the Urban Ranger from UA? I ask, because Rangers are not known for their sparkling people-skills either, yet the variant gets Gather Information in exchange for Survival, among other changes. RE: Playing against type... I was commenting on the idea that, for example, a rogue could be a straight-up fighter without all that sneaking-around nonsense. He COULD, but that would be a bizarre choice, because it cripples his defining class ability, and he'll die in short order from the damage he's taking. Again, certainly a fighter is a front-liner meat shield, but his class flavor is that of somebody highly trained in the art of fighting. He can wear the heaviest armors, weild unusual weapons, and use a near-endless number of tactical moves. The Barbarian's flavor is a big, powerful warrior who doesn't have a lot of technique, but makes up for it with brute force. I think there must be room for all three of those in a city, and saying that you can (in fact, must?) replace C with a combination of A and B is... irritating. In what way do sneak dice and lots of feats equate to rage and damage reduction? I don't get it.
scwolf 03-09-05, 02:07 AM	You mentioned that social interaction has always been the barbarian's weakness. I don't know about that... I always figured the barbarian's weakness is the fact that he is, after all, a meat shield. A big part of the concept behind Barbarian, is that they're outsiders to normal civilized society. They're supposed to be the square peg in the round hole, even in cultures where "berserker warriors" are commonplace. Since you said that this character is going to be a shifter, it should be fairly easy to work this particular aspect of RPing the character. If instead, you were playing one of the more civilized and urbanized Eberron races, It'd be harder to buy into the character. It'd be like Ben Stiller as Mr. Furious in the movie Mystery Men.
alexanderwales 03-09-05, 03:06 AM	My other thought is that getting the information is often more a matter of who you ask and what you ask, rather than how you ask. Having an intuition about who has the real info doesn't make you a good speaker, or a convincing liar. Actually, I think that this is where the Cha bonus comes in. If you have a 10 in Cha but you pour ranks into Gather Information, then you don't talk smooth at all, you just get results by asking the right questions, and listening to people. I don't think that this is at all out of place for an Urban Barbarian. I think that the tendency is to stereotype barbarians as big and stupid (something which the illiteracy doesn't help). Saying that you should become a fighter/rogue when all you really want is a big guy with a smashing club is enforcing stereotypes. Think of a bouncer. You keep pestering him, and he gets angry, and then you get punched in the face. It doesn't hurt because the bouncer has trained himself to effectively use his fists (Weapon Focus). It doesn't hurt because he sacrificed a lot of accuracy for the punch (Power Attack). No, it doesn't even hurt because he knows where to hit and you weren't expecting it (Sneak Attack). It hurts because his adrenaline was flowing, because he was mad, and because he's strong (Rage).
Hodo 03-09-05, 06:07 AM	Well, like I say... it's fairly insulting to have 'munchkin' and 'powergamer' spring so easily into his posts, and on top of that I'm accused of lacking 'creative thought' and wasting my DM's time. So, yah, I'm gonna be somewhat ticked off. He's never called you a Munchkin. He has called you a powergamer, and that sounds pretty accurate. For whatever reasons, you're making a character that as as few weaknesses as possible, and even going out of your way to cover up those weaknesses to make a fairly powerful character. Whether this is out of desire to dominate the game, desire to simply have a cool character, desire to be effective in the game alongside other PCs, or some other reasoning is irrelevant. Whether it's intentional or accidental is irrelevant. It's powergaming. Many/most of us do it, but it doesn't mean that we necessarily lack imagination or can't roleplay. When he says your DM has beter things to worry about, he's asking you to show some compasion for your DM. Creating a story, thinking up plothooks, NPCs, modifying OTHER classes, etc is already a long and often difficult process. Having to go and redesign a base class for a player who has a specific concept in mind- and tailoring it to that player's needs while making sure it makes sense in game, is balanced, and whatnot takes up time the DM could be using to make the game better overall. Your DM said it was okay though, so this might be one of RPM's less prudent concerns. Obviously you can build a character -- even a rogue -- that stinks at all CHA based skills, but is a master of information gathering. What does that represent in-game? A rogue gets bluff, diplomacy, and gather information as a class skill. The Only way to suck at that is to either have a very low charisma modifier, or not put ranks into those skills. A Barbarian has NO cha based skills aside from intimidate, so they are by virtue, less inclined to gaining information than a rogue, bard, half-elf, etc. The Barbarian simply has less potential than a rogue when it comes to being a good info gatherer. People with a low charisma modifier come across as generally unpleasant to be around. It's not just their looks, but their general temperment that turns people off or drives them away. They could be too pushy, or spit when they talk, or have a lazy eye, or stutter, distacting scars, or swear uncotrollably, etc. [/quote]I think somebody who is skilled at GI and nothing else of interaction would be somebody who is a good listener, who can draw out another person without being particularly convincing, as a high Bluff or Diplomacy would. Maybe it's just somebody who is quiet, and good at steering the conversation. Alternatively, maybe it's just somebody who knows how to use sex appeal, for instance. A pretty girl can get guys to say a lot more than they meant to, after all. [/quote] You can put ranks in Gather information as a cross class skill. There's nothing preventing that. This will show that for a big hulking brute, you are better than the average big hulking brute at gathering info. However, it also show that you will not have the same potential as that slick Bard or Rogue who knows ALL the right words and has a killer smile. As a big street fighting brute, one wouldn't imagine you being as charasmatic as many Bards or Rogues though. My other thought is that getting the information is often more a matter of who you ask and what you ask, rather than how you ask. Having an intuition about who has the real info doesn't make you a good speaker, or a convincing liar. That's where the skill modieifer comes into it. You're still a guy who's been raised on the streets and fighting to the death over everything until you're a monster that can easily wrestle bears and big cats in fits of madness. You may be able to ask good questions, but that still doesn't mean you're not imposing, aggressive, or hot headed, which can be a turn off, and still result in a limited GI skill rank. You mentioned that social interaction has always been the barbarian's weakness. I don't know about that... I always figured the barbarian's weakness is the fact that he is, after all, a meat shield. He's the front line, but not the one who casts the spells that makes the peoples fall down. I desperately do not want to be relegated, as so many meat shields are, to the guy that sits up and plays during a battle, then pushes his chair back and might as well leave the room while everyone else handles the RP! That's what I thought. ;) Your main concern seems to be being considered a brainless brute who's deemed useless once the combat ends (common for the Barbarian). Just because you have lower ranks than the Rogue or Bard doesn't mean you can't roleplay. Sure they will be the most likely to perform the critical dimplomacy, gather information, and bluff checks, but social interaction is so much more than trying to butter people up, questioning them for info, or lying to them. Proper Rping i more than a series of opposed skill checks. Whenever you experience role playing situations you can still ask reasonable questions. You can still makeobservations, jokes, or suggestions. I used to play a Halfling Rogue who had some ranks in diplomacy and bluff. The party sorcerer had higher ranks, as well as royal blood and was the party's face, but that never stopped me from chiming in. Never stpped me from waiting in the local tavern until the obligatory mysterious cloaked figure walked in and took a seat in the shadows, at which point I cheerfully walked up and offered him a drink and friendly chat. Never stopped me from getting myself mixed up with and extorted by a bunch of other Halfling rogues (resulted in the party Barbarian dying :P ). Never stopped me from having an irrational fear of Dragon or hatred of elves. Not having social skills as clas skills does not mean you can't socialize. Your responses and experiences will just be different. No you won't be as effective at gathering info, and the party probably won't come to you for hard-to-get information about the underworld. That doesn't mean you can't use what information and urban survial skills you DO have to role play. That doesn't mean you can't have any ranks in those skills. I'd think this would make the Fighter/Rogue idea all the more attractive to you. You're not going to be a big stupid meat shield (but still useful in combat), and unless there's another Rogue or Bard in the party, you'll probably be the go to guy in many social situations. Do you have the same complaints about the Urban Ranger from UA? I ask, because Rangers are not known for their sparkling people-skills either, yet the variant gets Gather Information in exchange for Survival, among other changes. Practically a different class than the original Ranger. They lose more skills than they gain (skills that are useful anywhere outside a metropolis). They lose endurance. They lose spell casting progression. They lose their animal companion. They lose their inclination toward the bow, which is generally much more powerful than the crossbow in combat. Better in role playing scenarios in an urban combat, but definately more limited in combat potential. RE: Playing against type... I was commenting on the idea that, for example, a rogue could be a straight-up fighter without all that sneaking-around nonsense. He COULD, but that would be a bizarre choice, because it cripples his defining class ability, and he'll die in short order from the damage he's taking. I've played a couple of succesful melee rogues. They all could can hide sure, but once the melee started, he was in there with the best of them. In one group, I was actually he heavy hitter, since evryone else played Elven rogues/bards/wizards (and in an undead/demon heavy campaign no less!) In fact, most Rogues I know are melee focused who don't sneak around using ranged attacks. Sneak attack is only good out to 30 feet, which can be an anoyance to archers who get rushed the second they can get a successful attack off. The Best way for Rogues to take advantage of their sneak attack skills is to stand right next to enenmy, preferably with someone on the other side, and stab/slahs/kick/bite them. Again, certainly a fighter is a front-liner meat shield, but his class flavor is that of somebody highly trained in the art of fighting. He can wear the heaviest armors, weild unusual weapons, and use a near-endless number of tactical moves. The only way a fighter gets unusual weapons is with exotic weapon profeciency, which anyone can take. Otherwise, he gets the same weapon selection as the Barbarian. Most that I've seen take the twin weapon fighting route. Those feats can be used for lots of things. As mentioned before, you can take toughness, endurance, and many unarmed related feats. You become a fighter who's "tactical moves" consists of beating people over the head with his fists, as opposed to any unusual weapons. A fighter can wear armor one grade higher than the Barbarian, but they don't have to. Many don't. The Barbarian's flavor is a big, powerful warrior who doesn't have a lot of technique, but makes up for it with brute force. Who generally happens to be from some sort of semi-nomadic tribe in the wild. In fact, in ALL my years of gaming, I've never seen a Barbarian who wasn't from some kind of tribal culture. I've seen brutish meleeing rogues, fighters who don't go with full plate, a tower shield, and spiked chain, and lots of other "non-conventional" player concepts, but never a straight Barbarian raised on the streets or one focusing on people skills. I think there must be room for all three of those in a city, and saying that you can (in fact, must?) replace C with a combination of A and B is... irritating. In what way do sneak dice and lots of feats equate to rage and damage reduction? I don't get it. Okay I'll try to help. You obviously don't like the fighter/rogue so I won't push it any more. :cool: What modifications could you make? I'd drop profeciency with martial weapons, shields, and probably medium armor. You're a street fighter, and those guys don't usually use martial weapons, shields, or armor. Associated Barbarian traits are lost when wearing medium or heavy armor or using any shields. This could also help you make a better case for keeping damage reduction and the d12 hit die. Not sure how much running around you do, but we could potnetially drop. craft handle animal ride swim Replace those with knowledge (local), survival (urban), and sense motive. Replace Listen with spot, since you're more likely to see something comming in a bustling city than hear it coming. Trap sense could probably stay where it is, as would uncanny dodge to keep you from being ambushed. You've gotten this far on instinct/strength. I'd probably add literacy, at least in common if nothing else. That help any? I think that the tendency is to stereotype barbarians as big and stupid (something which the illiteracy doesn't help). I tend to see them like Native Americans or nomadic Asians- at least with Humans, Halflings, Gnomes, and the like. I generally see half-orc and orcish Barbarians as not too bright, and a bot more violent (especially Orcs). I tend to attribute this to a difference in philosophy. Barbarians just don't see life the way most other "civilized" people do. There aren't so many rules regarding social classes, etiquette, and saving face, and if there are those in the Barbarian's culyure, it's not the same as the new one. Therefore, they just act differently than would be expected in social situations, and get things many consider common sense wrong- which leads many to conclude that they're dumb. It's like an average guy walking into a party full of snooty intellectual aristocrats. Sure the guys isn't STUPID but for most intents and purposes, compared to the other folks around him, he doesn't have the knowledge and skills deemed minimal to survive, let alone get the better of anyone else socially or in terms of knowledge. Unless he's just really charming, his general lack of relative refinement and percieved lower caste status would also be detrimental to his charisma modifier. Think of a bouncer. You keep pestering him, and he gets angry, and then you get punched in the face. It doesn't hurt because the bouncer has trained himself to effectively use his fists (Weapon Focus). It doesn't hurt because he sacrificed a lot of accuracy for the punch (Power Attack). No, it doesn't even hurt because he knows where to hit and you weren't expecting it (Sneak Attack). It hurts because his adrenaline was flowing, because he was mad, and because he's strong (Rage). I'd say that here the focus is too much on intent and less on end effect. Of course, I'm a big silhoeutte fan, so for me, damage comes from anywhere. First off, in this situation, it would be subdual damage. The only way the boxer could actually do damage to my actul HP would be if he had the unarmed damage feats. Who says a bouncer can't work out at the gym? He can't punch a punching bag? If we're going with the stereotypical bouncer, he's probably wearing some brass knuckles and probably knows how to use them better than a commoner (weapon focus). That was a single powerful hit delievered with all his strength at the most obvious target: my face. That sounds alot like a power attack. I didn't see the hit comming did I? An unexpected hit between the eyes - a sensitive area- hurts. I'd say that could be a sneak attack. The rage thing works just as well. However, is the bouncer uncontrolable after he punchces me? Is it nigh impossible to reason with him and does he lose most all cognitive abilities during that time? Right after punching me, does he have to sit down and take a breather? I'd say he could have used rage, but no more than he used unarmed damage feats, weapon focus, power attack, and sneak attack to clock me in one punch. BTW. sorry for making my post so long. I honestly dont expect a response to all of this.
scwolf 03-09-05, 07:12 AM	In fact, in ALL my years of gaming, I've never seen a Barbarian who wasn't from some kind of tribal culture. Which is one of the strengths of the Eberron setting. In this case, it's produced a barbarian that grew up in one of Sharn's Shifter ghettos. In the lower levels of Sharn, there are plenty of neighborhoods that consist almost entirely of races that are normally only found as nomadic wasteland savages in other settings. Shifters, being the most savage of the new PC races in Eberron, fit right into that sort of social structure, right next to the bugbears and the goblins.
Keenath 03-09-05, 10:57 AM	[The Urban Ranger is] practically a different class than the original Ranger. They lose more skills than they gain (skills that are useful anywhere outside a metropolis). They lose endurance. They lose spell casting progression. They lose their animal companion. They lose their inclination toward the bow, which is generally much more powerful than the crossbow in combat. Better in role playing scenarios in an urban combat, but definately more limited in combat potential. Um... what copy of Unearthed Arcana are YOU reading? This description is nothing like the Urban Ranger. You get all the standard Ranger abilities, except: Remove Survival, Knowledge(Nature), and Knowledge(Dungeoneering) Add Gather Info, Knowledge(Local), and Sense Motive Animal companion is limited to medium size You get the Urban Tracking feat instead of Track (use GI to find people) You only get half your normal Wild Empathy bonus You may select an organization as a favored enemy instead of just races Your spell list is changed to remove nature-spells and add city-spells You don't get Woodland Stride or Camoflage Swift Tracker works to halve the time for GI checks (See Urban Tracking) Hide in plain sight works ANYWHERE, not just in natural settings There is no mention of changing weapon proficiencies, nor any alteration to spell progression (though the list changes).
RPM33 03-09-05, 05:17 PM	"He's never called you a Munchkin. He has called you a powergamer, and that sounds pretty accurate. For whatever reasons, you're making a character that as as few weaknesses as possible, and even going out of your way to cover up those weaknesses to make a fairly powerful character." "When he says your DM has beter things to worry about, he's asking you to show some compasion for your DM. Creating a story, thinking up plothooks, NPCs, modifying OTHER classes, etc is already a long and often difficult process. Having to go and redesign a base class for a player who has a specific concept in mind- and tailoring it to that player's needs while making sure it makes sense in game, is balanced, and whatnot takes up time the DM could be using to make the game better overall. " I should say that is a fairly accurate assesment of some of my main concerns. Thank you Hodo for phrasing my argument in a more palatable fashion for Keenath. I have been called many things in my day. Blunt usually comes in amongst the top 5 most popular, while sensitive finds itself toward the bottom. Keenath, just to be clear, I never suggested you lacked creativity, far from it.
Old Sparky 03-09-05, 10:04 PM	Ya know, I was just paging through my Dragon Magazines recently and found civilized barbarians (i.e. "urban") in the Class Acts section in the back of issue #323. I thought it was a pretty cool idea, too.
HailSpork 03-09-05, 11:06 PM	When I first read this, I came to the same conclusion as scwolf: the urban thug variant from UA. There is another good alternative: Play a standard barbarian, don't take any ranks in skills that are wilderness related, and take the city-based skills as cross-class skills. If you allow yourselves to pick and choose which skills are class and which are cross-class, it completely defeats the purpose of the cross-class system. Afterall, what are cross-class skills if not for learning a skill that your training is not inclined towards? I'm not saying that a barbarian can't use tact when speaking to people to get them to say more than they intended, I'm saying that it is harder for a barbarian to learn these skills. A question you need to ask is: What makes an urban barbarian special? Was he raised in a completely urban environment? If so, how can you justify the rage ability, which historically dates back to the Norse Vikings' berserkers, who specially trained themselves to use their anger. See this article (http://www.florilegium.org/files/NORSE/Berserkergang-art.html) for more information. If your barbarian descended from a standard barbarian tribe and moved to a city (at a young age or not), then it would make sense to take your city skills as cross-class or multiclass. You mentioned before that one of the problems is that you want to play a shifter, but shifter's favored class is ranger, right? That aside, one solution mentioned was to take urban thug and possibly multiclass with rogue to get the uncanny dodge abilities you wanted. Here's another reccomendation: Take some levels of barbarian to get all the barbarian abilities you want (and don't take ranks in the wilderness skills), then multiclass into the Urban Ranger variant to get all of the urban skills you want. The end result is a barbarian with all his beefiness (well, a few less hp) and raging with the skills necessary to adapt to city life, all with no XP penalty or cross-class skills. That was the desired goal, right?
HailSpork 03-09-05, 11:19 PM	Oh, I just remembered something else. Earlier, Keenath suggested using the survival skill to track people. I wanted to point out that the Urban Tracking feat relies on GI rather than survival (if my memory serves me right, anyway...) Also, not having charisma-based skills definately does not prohibit you from RP'ing. In my current game, I play a mage with almost no social skills. The cleric has a diplomacy of 18 or something. I try as much as possible to handle negotiations instead of him, not because he won't do a better job, but because he has different goals in mind.