I took this from the DM Questions and Answers threads since i couldn't post in another players topic i thought that i would bring it here.

LaBrea I frown upon them, and certainly the PC will not be getting any perks from me. An example would be barbarian/fighter.

Well i would certainly disagree with that since i actually play a Barbarian/Fighter who multiclassed after being tutored by another PC i would say that being denied perks for building my Character through Rp with others and interaction goes against most of what this server is supposed to stand for.

Can i also add that i did app for this when they where going to make Barbarian/Fighters a restricted class.

What do other players/dm's think should a player be judged on the build or the RP?

There's nothing wrong with it at all. While that is our official policy, sometimes it's difficult for DM's to refrain from listing personal likes and dislikes. In short, feel free to multiclass as you see fit, and unless it borders on the realms of absurdity for the concept or is not allowed in our rules, feel free to play it.

RP is everything, sir. However, many times the barbarian/fighter multiclass is not properly RP'd as anything more then a barbarian with more feats, or fighter with rage. Sadly I've little time to DM, and when I do DM I generally overlook characters with such builds. I'll just be upfront with that. If I do catch you rocking socks off then I, of course would be most happy to reward you.

https://efupw.com/efu1-forum/topic/18/18327/how-to-rock-my-socks-off/index.html

LaBrea Sadly I've little time to DM, and when I do DM I generally overlook characters with such builds.

Mikhail The Heretic

What do other players/dm's think should a player be judged on the build or the RP?

Ah, but Mikhail! You're seperating the two, when they are inextricably linked.

Your character COMES from the build, and should be reflected in the way it's played. Barbarian / Fighters almost -never- are, simply because it's almost impossible to do so, and a 5 minute 'tutoring' session won't necessarily sway a person from being an uncouth barbarian to a style conscious fighter anyway.

I don't understand why a barbarian/fighter is attractive as a build. Is that because it is a low level server?

[quote="Nuclear Catastrophe"]

Mikhail The Heretic

Barbarian / Fighters almost -never- are, simply because it's almost impossible to do so, and a 5 minute 'tutoring' session won't necessarily sway a person from being an uncouth barbarian to a style conscious fighter anyway.

That is just wrong. On so many levels.

I know the DMs here have a hate-on for that combination, but seriously, its so incredibly common in DnD that to claim otherwise is simply without precedent.

I've never seen anything in any canon DnD product, or even any fantasy setting that even hints fighter/barbarian is not a completely viable combination, or even all that uncommon.

Imagine if Geronimo joined the Marine Corps. It just doesn't work.

Imagine if Conan specialized with a great sword.

Imagine the Scorpion King specializing with kamas.

Imagine a Samurai or ninja going ape-shit on his foes, over powering them not with skill but brute force and raw anger.

Imagine a dwarf trained in the battle axe for years becoming a drunken battle rager.

Imagine a barbarian spending years training and honing his mind to fight in a specialized manner.

Imagine a warrior losing his mind one day on the battlefield, becoming an avatar of unthinking fury while relying on the instincts he's honed for years in the academy.

My imagination could go on. I could grab any source book and point out dozens of barbarian/fighters.

Just because some people are stuck in this odd box, that they've created outside actual canon explanations and guides, is no reason to think the box really exists. It is honestly baffling me.

I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm just saying it doesn't happen with great frequency, and it's a little bit more involved than simply going crazy one day and raging.

A barbarian is a part of an entirely different culture. A fighter who becomes one doesn't just go mad. All you've got there is a crazy fighter. In order to become a barbarian, he must renounce civilization as well, or in the reverse case, the barbarian must embrace it.

Look man, if you can pull it off, I don't think the DMs are going to stop you. I play a twenty-something elf from Lower, for crying out loud.

Mikhail The Heretic What do other players/dm's think should a player be judged on the build or the RP?

No.

No, I don't think they should be judged at all, but it happens. We all make judgments. It's a sign of intelligence. When it becomes too strong of a habit and you start telling people how to act, that's when it goes overboard.

Let's say you log into the DM client for a nice evening of EfU, have a browse over the selection of characters to peek in on, and come across Henry Shadowvine slaying Chosen. Henry's classes are 1 Barbarian/6 Fighter and he's wearing full plate.

I believe there's not a DM in this place who would just send that person a tell to say how bad their build is; every single DM here is just so far above that. If a DM talks to you about your build, likely it's so they can get a better understanding of your character, or to find out if -you- have an understanding of your own character. If you do get called on something, try not to be defensive or offended; that's something I struggle a lot with myself, but I think that making the effort is appreciated.

Also, about Barbarians: they're uncivilized by nature, and non-lawful by requisite, but anything beyond that is really up to interpretation. For example, noble's son with a deep, seething hatred for the Divine Right and it's oppression of the people would reject the formalities of his station. It's likely that this noble's son would be trained in the arts of war, but pay less attention to concentration and study than to the feeling of his own rage and discontent. Such a character could reasonably adopt the Barbarian class.

As for Fighters, it's said that they are at home in any society. It's not so much of a stretch to assume that a Barbarian of Uthgar (sp?) would get drawn away more and more into the training of his martial prowess and just naturally develop a personal discipline. Every technique that exists was invented somewhere.

And my ultimate point is that you shouldn't feel the need to worry about what the DMs will think of your build, or you for playing it. Just focus on what you are doing, and you'll do just fine.

lovethesuit For example, noble's son with a deep, seething hatred for the Divine Right and it's oppression of the people would reject the formalities of his station. It's likely that this noble's son would be trained in the arts of war, but pay less attention to concentration and study than to the feeling of his own rage and discontent.

We're talking about someone basically going feral. You've got to take a long walk in life to go from being a high society prince to a wild primitive, and you don't get there in one step. Does this noble have lycanthropy, or some other condition to make the transition so sudden? There has to be some accounting of the total transformation of the character's worldview.

Getting angry does not equal the ability to go into a barbarian rage. It is a berzerk state of mind, and historically speaking it was accompanied by large doses of psychedelics. Why do you think Cave Worm tribe gets along so well with Mycopolis? It's the mushrooms, man.

Here is the problem PlayerCharacter:

Barbarian is not a "culture" it is a class and a way of fighting.

It is not feral. That is a mindset, but barbarian is a class and a way of fighting.

It is not a deep symbolic change, or a difficult to master path--those are represented by Prestige Classes.

You seem to be operating on a fundamental misunderstanding of what the barbarian class is.

The berserker rage is helped by chemicals, but it was not mandatory. History is replete with other people able to go into similar rages and trance like states. All the same, in the fantasy setting, the "rage" ability is not chemically induced anyway as a general rule.

Please, I'd appreciate if this does not get off topic into a barbarian/fighter debate. It's always been RP + attitude that gets rewards and perks from me, and I was just highlighting one particular build that I see and dislike. This is my personal taste. I could've used ranger 1/rogueX as another build which I'm not terribly in love with.

Nuclear Catastrophe Barbarian / Fighters almost -never- are, simply because it's almost impossible to do so, and a 5 minute 'tutoring' session won't necessarily sway a person from being an uncouth barbarian to a style conscious fighter anyway.

I would agree that it is never simple though i would say the tutoring sessions with Jozan went on a lot longer than five minutes he was mentoring and tutoring him for months before he died and in his case it was role played out.

I can understand disliking certain builds as human that is all quite common to have prejudices and dislikes but at the end of the day i feel it's wrong to automatically judge someone on the classes they choose my point was don't be so hasty if you personally dislike something that is alright but as a DM you should try and leave those prejudices at the door when you log in. And as i said NC i even applied to do Kyle as a Barbarian Fighter when you where going to change the rules.... I never did find out if you guys knocked that back or not... not that it matters now.

Achilles was a fighter/barb.

Can I have my money now, Mr. Oroborous?

Achilles is sooooo badass.

Edit:

After thinking about achilles and his badassness... Nightmare came to mind from Soul Calibur 2. Totally a fighter/barbarian.

But anyways... there is the theory that fighters can fight with great anger and rage... without being raging in the same way that a barbarian is. Just because fighters are technical combat specialists who get tons of feats to symbolize learning combat extremely well doesn't mean they are all in control of their emotions while out slashing heads.

Dwarves have a class, not supported in NWN called battlerager..essentialy a fighter that enters a bloodrage...some books have mentioned them. It is a huge part of dwarven lore, but the only way to play one in the setting would to be barb/ fighter.. but that is only one example.

What about a monk/rogue/fighter.. to be a martial artists ala bruce lee...in a fantasy setting appropriate char..powergameing? I would say no, not if you were takeing feats that showed a hand to hand expert, who knew exactly where to hit you to really hurt, and was tough as nails..of course, you would not wear armor, but these are the classes you may want, to similate a true martial artist..the monk class is actually pretty weak as a straight monk to show one who has devouted their fighting disipline to hand to hand combat..but this is building the class choices around the character concept, not what is the most effictive powerhouse build out there, and then trying to whitewash it with a flimsy concept and call it done. I think creative use of all the tools ala (class, skillpoints, etc) to make your char unique in our setting is encouraged, as long as it is based in rp not pwerwnage questors 4 phat lootz! Course I could be wrong, I only have just over 300 posts here, and in the past year and a half or so, have only had one char ever live past level 6. ... a pure novice by all accounts.

PlayerCharacter words

Uh, holy crap, calm down? Please don't hurt me? I didn't mean to have an opinion opposite yours! OH GOD

Where did I say a noble suddenly became a crazy wildman? I didn't.

First off, I'd like to say that a number of these examples for Barbarian/Fighter are simply faulted, and tend to reflect already referenced individual instances of rage that, as I believe NC already illustrated, do not properly reflect the Barbarian class, just really people who get really angry. I'd also like to say that as far as I've ever been concerned, Barbarian has been as much of a cultural thing as it has been about combat technique. Even with that, there are some decent examples of Fighter/Barbarians in sourcebooks. But most those aren't matters of singular instances. They're products of significant developments. Not just five minute training sessions.

That aside, LaBrea's right. This is getting a bit off-topic.

Please, I'd appreciate if this does not get off topic into a barbarian/fighter debate. It's always been RP + attitude that gets rewards and perks from me, and I was just highlighting one particular build that I see and dislike. This is my personal taste. I could've used ranger 1/rogueX as another build which I'm not terribly in love with.

So, some Dms want to go to people with poor builds first, they do have every right to. If there are some classes/races/builds they don't like bothering to much due to past experiences- then you'll just have to make that much more of a splash in the RP Pond. Its not worth complaining about, and it not worth getting your panties all bunched up over.

Think of it as a challenge- because you'll have that much more you can prove to people. DMs don't ignore awesome Rp. They may not watch wizards if they happen to hate everything about them- same goes for clerics of gods they dislike. I'm not saying they will all avoid you- I'm saying that DMs want to have fun- its a game, let them pick what types of things they get involved with.

They will have favorites, and they will be better with certain classes, plots, or NPCs. We have enough Dms that someone wont get passed over by all of them for something as trivial as a class build. I'd rather not force Dms to watch people play things they don't like, thats just a bad idea on both sides of the aisle. So have fun, enjoy yourself- and don't worry about the little things.

We've all got our quirks. (like me, all my characters are so reserved, I bet they get bored watching me think/pace- right quickly!)

~Ebok.

"Poor builds" is an exaggeration. I think it's simply that some of them would prefer that people don't go for builds that are.... Well, I have difficulty phrasing it. I think it's just that it kind of casts certain characters in a poor light if a DM is forced to question whether or not someone is making a character based off of an optimized build, or are they basing that build off of something that makes sense for a well thought out concept.

Don't get me wrong.It's entirely possible for someone to have a compelling, interesting character that also has a good build that fits. Sometimes, however, people will do one or the other, and that can, at times, have bad results. But I don't speak for anyone else here, just my thoughts.

Totally playing a Monk/Druid this December to piss you whiners off. :twisted:

Why stop there...make it a monk/druid goblin.