Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 johnnii Oct 08, 2008 4:44:53	From the DMG about Brute monster roles: Brute monsters specialize in dealing damage in melee. Brutes have relatively low defenses but high hit points. They don't hit as often as other monsters, but they deal a lot of damage when they hit. They don't move around a lot, and they're big.
#2 karldark_dup Oct 08, 2008 4:53:16	that's the point of the barbarian class. Thug life!
#3 decivre Oct 08, 2008 5:37:07	The reason that monsters have a better distribution of roles is so that DMs can get an idea of how to play that character at a glance. PC roles are more general (only four of them) because you'll learn how to play that character as you play the game... the DM will likely only use any given monster once, meaning that he has to understand how to use him properly right now. Brute is a monster striker based around hitting hard and taking hard hits, just as a lurker can be a striker based around stealth, an a skirmisher is a striker based around mobility. So yes, the barbarian is the PC equivalent of the brute, just as the ranger is the PC equivalent of a skirmisher, a stealth rogue is the PC equivalent of a lurker, and a fighter is the PC equivalent of a soldier.
#4 pheonixiv Oct 08, 2008 7:21:33	PC roles are also very loose. It's possible to play a Wizard who almost has the damage output of a Striker for example, wheras Monster roles are much more ridged, which makes it significantly easier for the DM as he's not going to be putting anything like as much time into each monster as the players are into their PC and thus he cannot learn the naunces and tricks of every single enemy. So yeah, Barbarian (Rageblood at least) appears to be, in his basic incarnation, a PC Brute.
#5 johnnii Oct 08, 2008 7:33:00	We might have our first NPC template then that equals to Brute, with the barbarian template
#6 karldark_dup Oct 08, 2008 7:44:54	We might have our first NPC template then that equals to Brute, with the barbarian template it's perfect for a minotuar... Large Executioner's Axe or mordenkrag...
#7 akodoreign Oct 08, 2008 7:49:15	it's perfect for a minotuar... Large Executioner's Axe or mordenkrag... Yeah 7[W] with large executioners becomes 14d6 re roll 1s and 2s. That is pretty sick. Another option though is Maul 14d8. No brutal though. (shrug)
#8 karldark_dup Oct 08, 2008 7:56:58	Yeah 7[W] with large executioners becomes 14d6 re roll 1s and 2s. That is pretty sick. Another option though is Maul 14d8. No brutal though. (shrug) this is sorta off topic, but I've had this idea of using a minotuar ranger that dual wields fullblades...
#9 SYB Oct 08, 2008 8:17:15	this is sorta off topic, but I've had this idea of using a minotuar ranger that dual wields fullblades... Off-topic and illegal. The Minotaur racial feature lets you wield a large weapon. It does not let you wield two-handed weapons in one hand. So, you can wield a large bastard sword in one hand, but not a fullblade. -SYB
#10 karldark_dup Oct 08, 2008 8:19:20	Off-topic and illegal. The Minotaur racial feature lets you wield a large weapon. It does not let you wield two-handed weapons in one hand. So, you can wield a large bastard sword in one hand, but not a fullblade. -SYB And here i thought two handed weapons were just big one handed weapons...
#11 Seeker95 Oct 08, 2008 8:32:27	I can understand why he was fitting for the striker role, but he seems to work a lot like a brute; real meatshielding with the lack of enemy lockdown. If he were a monster, he would be a brute. But brute is not a PC role.
#12 pheonixiv Oct 08, 2008 18:32:46	And here i thought two handed weapons were just big one handed weapons... Nope, they're a seperate class of weapons you can only use with two hands.
#13 exposed_wires Oct 08, 2008 23:32:00	Nope, they're a seperate class of weapons you can only use with two hands. You need two hands or you can't touch all the keys.
#14 pheonixiv Oct 09, 2008 4:57:53	That... Almost looks like it makes sense, but really doesn't.
#15 archtyrant_terevoth Oct 09, 2008 5:14:56	Though really, I figure every barbarian is going to end up spending the feats to wear heavy armor anyway, so they'll probably end up with pretty respectable AC, despite the weak starting point. It's pretty hard in 4E to make a class be a low AC class, except at low levels. Everyone who isn't int or dex based ends up wearing heavy armor eventually anyway. It costs them some feats, but who cares because for the most part, feats suck.
#16 johnnii Oct 09, 2008 5:47:15	Though really, I figure every barbarian is going to end up spending the feats to wear heavy armor anyway, so they'll probably end up with pretty respectable AC, despite the weak starting point. It's pretty hard in 4E to make a class be a low AC class, except at low levels. Everyone who isn't int or dex based ends up wearing heavy armor eventually anyway. It costs them some feats, but who cares because for the most part, feats suck. Off-topic, with the amounts of usable feats, you're best off upgrading to max Chainmail if at all. If you feel a NEED to get the best armor, then your defender/defenders are doing something wrong, or your DM isn't the nicest guy around :P Also, even if the barbarian has heavy armor, he still lacks enemy lockdown, so it won't make him replace the defender. A decent off-tank maybe, but hardly capable of filling the entire role by himself.
#17 karldark_dup Oct 09, 2008 8:03:00	Nope, they're a seperate class of weapons you can only use with two hands. your obliviousness is legendary... So yeah we have a great example of what a brute PC ought to look like i hope to see another in the future.
#18 exposed_wires Oct 09, 2008 14:06:11	your obliviousness is legendary... Let me know when your own sense of self-satisfaction wears off because people prefer zingers to be, you know, funny.
#19 pheonixiv Oct 09, 2008 23:16:51	I see that one went right over your head Duck.
#20 mudbunny Oct 10, 2008 14:39:23	Puts on VCL hat Calm down guys. Keep the snarky comments and insults out of the discussion. Takes off VCL hat