Barbarian RP

[Raargant]

For the longest time, I've seen people make posts to the effect of, "Oh that honor and stuff, that only applies to the Glads. Barbarians don't care about that sort of stuff." Recently, for example, I glanced over the forum and saw a post saying, "A Barbarian might not really care, a Gladiator is all about honour, they would care."

This is totally, totally wrong. Barbarians care about honor and what not, just as much as any other Warmaster.

From help barbarian,

BARBARIAN

Shunned by their fellow warriors, the BARBARIANS secluded themselves even

more from their society and the rest of the world to further develop a

fighting style all their own. Often employing what may be considered

thuggish tactics to some, it is not uncommon to see these seemingly rough

cut men use every aspect of the battlefield to their advantage from the dirt

on the ground to trampling their opponent while they are down.

While those that call themselves the BARBARIANS are every bit as skilled in

combat as the GLADIATORS, these brutish men have chosen to rely on more than

just their skill with a blade. While the principles and ideals of the

warrior lifestyle still hold true to these men of combat, it is their belief

that having the upper hand on their opponent is the key to victory whether

it is by their skill alone or accepting arcane forces.

See also: WARMASTER, GLADIATOR

Nowhere in the help file is there even a hint that barbarians are less honorable. The two primary points it makes is that 1) Barbarians use fighting tactics that can be seen as thuggish (stepping on people), and 2) Barbarians believe in gaining the upper hand, whether by skill or magic. Not 'by any means necessary'. The help file specifically states that the 'principles and ideals' still apply to Barbarians. What are the 'principles and ideals'?

From help warmaster:

From these warriors a great society has risen based on three major values:

Honor, Physical Strength, and Self Reliance. Combining these three

strengths the Warmasters of the land have managed to grow to a world power,

rivaling the most powerful armies with their own strengths. Commoners often

report seeing these behemoths standing on street corners evangelistically

preaching the arts of self-reliance over everything else. A battle must

be won not by uttering gibberish, but by relying on your physical skills. It

is also said that those who dare heckle their ministries and reject their

indoctrination, often find themselves hanging from a pike, used as a

sparring dummy for new recruits - for they will obliterate any and all who

would dare stand against their way of life.

Honor is EVERY bit as important to a Barbarian as a Gladiator; the one and only difference in their RP is that gladiators are total purists when it comes to using only non-magical fighting methods, whereas Barbarians use any and all tools at their disposal.

[jibber]

Nicely explained and said. I've always thought that Barbarians should be like that, and I've played both the Barbarian's I've had in that regard as if they were Gladiators without the 'magic restriction'.

Thanks for clearing this up.

[Insepiddeception]

I always keep my train of thought between Barbarians and Gladiators as such: They both thrive on Honor and the glory of combat but whereas Barbarians love the kill at the end, the Gladiators are more proud of the combat before the kill. Probably not a correct way of thinking either but I like it.

[Anume]

I always keep my train of thought between Barbarians and Gladiators as such: They both thrive on Honor and the glory of combat but whereas Barbarians love the kill at the end' date=' the Gladiators are more proud of the combat before the kill. Probably not a correct way of thinking either but I like it.[/quote']

Never play a NEUTRAL aligned barbarian then. I see an outcast coming your way F A S T

(As any neutral caballed neutrals ALSO and especially need a reason to kill people. I want that shiny does not count either. Enemy cabal / clan, killed / attacked you / a friend / ally before, cabal duty or a real rp reason should be there.

[Insepiddeception]

gotcha

[a-guitarist]

I was the one who posted the original line. I know I've read the help files a dozen times at least, but there is something about the name "Barbarian" that always just screams savage and chaotic to me. Always makes me forget that it's different here in FL than in pop-culture and other games. Thanks for reminding me, Raar.

a-g

[WagesofSin]

I beg to differ. Raar, there seems to be some very selective bolding to that help file. You have your interpretation, but I have another:

BARBARIAN

Shunned by their fellow warriors, the BARBARIANS secluded themselves even

more from their society and the rest of the world to further develop a

fighting style all their own. Often employing what may be considered

thuggish tactics to some, it is not uncommon to see these seemingly rough

cut men use every aspect of the battlefield to their advantage from the dirt

on the ground to trampling their opponent while they are down.

While those that call themselves the BARBARIANS are every bit as skilled in

combat as the GLADIATORS, these brutish men have chosen to rely on more than

just their skill with a blade. While the principles and ideals of the

warrior lifestyle still hold true to these men of combat, it is their belief

that having the upper hand on their opponent is the key to victory whether

it is by their skill alone or accepting arcane forces.

See also: WARMASTER, GLADIATOR

I actually feel that this help file does suggest that they would use any means necissary. Kicking dirt in your oppoenents eyes and hitting people while they're down is honorable?

My interpretation of Barbarian RP, as well as the way I played my Barbarian Muarahn, is that life itself is a kind of battle. There is no such things as "not being prepared' or concepts of 'fairness' in war. One should always be prepared for combat. The concept of the civilian should be alien to Barbarians. If you lose in combat and are not beheaded, you must understand that the only reason you live is because of the victors mercy. Not from some ideal. It's about survival of the fittest.

Glads on the other hand, always seemed to me as warriors who are more interested with battle as an art form. Perfecting their craft, learning new skills, fighting plenty of duels in order to become a master at battle.

There seems to be another issue at hand as well. Can we apply real-life standards of honor to the situations that arise in game? Honestly when looking at human history everyone, be it a kingdom, empire, military order/society, claims honor for themselves yet when we examine how they operated in war and politics honor takes the back seat to result. So I ask, what exactly is honor in FL? Is attacking my oppoenent at his pit dishonorable

? Is attacking a lesser equipped foe dishonorable? Dirt kicking? Bashing while they have no prot. shield?

I think the game mechanics make it impossible to call any in-combat tactics/strategies dishonorable. That doesn't leave us with many other in-game situations.

[mya]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor

"Honour or Honor (see spelling differences), (from the Latin word honos, honoris) is the evaluation of a person's trustworthiness and social status based on that individual's espousals and actions. Honour is deemed exactly what determines a person's character: whether or not the person reflects honesty, respect, integrity, or fairness."

Striking from the shadows is honourless.

Striking at someone without announcing your attack is honourless. (Surprise)

Finishing an already wounded target. (by other person)

Breaking your word on something.

Knowing what honour is, is quite easy.

Having the strength to accept the limitation that come with being honorable, is the most difficult part.

[f0xx]

That is why I think thieves who are in Gladiator can no way be RPed correctly.

I've been blackjacked by a thief in gladiator who was sitting at my temple when I recalled from battle with someone else. I was at awful wounds. He still pried a lot of items and ony a cabal mate who engaged me saved me from certain death.

If that is what honor is about, then I really don't wanna know the opposite of it.

[Twinblades713]

I really like Wages' argument.

[Guest emp_newb]

I think barbarians should be. Barbaric. Making them hold a similar stance to gladiators would be essentially having 2 of the same sects. Pandy and Reaver differ, Praetorian, and sigil, mysterum and temporum. So on and so forth. I always thought of barbarians as ruthless balls out fighters who just love battle. Not really caring how it happens, or what happens in it. They just love to fight.

[Twinblades713]

My name's Finley, and I like to fight!

[f0xx]

My name's Finley' date=' and I [i']like to fight!

Yeah, and kick you while you are on the ground.

That surely is honorable...

I agree with what the ****in' asshat said.

[Raargant]

I beg to differ. Raar, there seems to be some very selective bolding to that help file. You have your interpretation, but I have another:

I actually feel that this help file does suggest that they would use any means necissary. Kicking dirt in your oppoenents eyes and hitting people while they're down is honorable?

Kicking dirt into an opponent's eyes is, quite frankly, something each and every melee class does. Hitting people who YOU knock them down is something which is part of nearly every real martial arts school, western or otherwise; it's only in the gentlemanly 'fencing' schools of medieval Europe that such is not the case, and those schools are designed for formal dueling, not for warfare and life-and-death battle, which is the world of FL. There is nothing inherently dishonorable about kicking dirt into an opponent's eyes; it might not be gentlemanly, but that's why they are barbarians. There is nothing inherently dishonorable about breaking someone's arm or disabling them while they are on the ground; it might not be Knightly/gentlemanly, but they are barbarians.

The part you quoted and the name barbarian refers solely to their fighting style, and does not detract from the notions of honor and self-reliance which hold true for all Warmasters. The sentence specifically before it states that the 'thuggish tactics' refers to their in-battle techniques; the paragraph after it stresses that this the principles and ideals of the Warmasters stills hold true to them, and that they simply use more methods than pure swordsmanship, including other parts of their body, the terrain, and magical assistance.

What is honor?

Honor is integrity: You keep your word and hold to it, even if it costs you something to do so.

Honor is equity: You fight your opponent by yourself, instead of jumping them with a pack of others. This also falls under the 'self-reliance' part of Warmaster. You do not lay in wait for when your opponent is already badly wounded or near-death from someone else to launch your attack.

Do you know what 'honor' is for a Knight? Then you know what it is for a Warmaster as well. They do share that much in common.

[MeleeCrazy]

this is the way i have thought it always to be, that and barabarians are likely to use drugs, potions, and other such boosts.

[WagesofSin]

Kicking dirt into an opponent's eyes is' date=' quite frankly, something each and every melee class does.[/quote']

And that makes it honorable? Everyone is doing it so it's ok? What was the name of that faulty logic, argumentum ad populum or something? Each and everyone who can dirt kick, can choose not to, we do it because it's a combat advantage.

Hitting people who YOU knock them down is something which is part of nearly every real martial arts school, western or otherwise; it's only in the gentlemanly 'fencing' schools of medieval Europe that such is not the case, and those schools are designed for formal dueling, not for warfare and life-and-death battle, which is the world of FL.

I don't think you're being fair here. So you are trying to draw parallels to the real world, fine. Your point is that FL is a world of war, not fencing. Fine. This supposedly justifies kicking people when they are down and kicking dirt into the eyes of oppoenent(a historically dishounorable act). So you are, in essence, saying the same thing I am. Life is brutal, life is war. We will do anything to win, anything to survive, we are Barbarian. Just like it is in real-life, all tactics are viable in war, while in peace we will call ourselves great, mighty, and honorable. Such is the world of FL, IMO, and it's entirely ok to roleplay it in my opinion.

There is nothing inherently dishonorable about kicking dirt into an opponent's eyes; it might not be gentlemanly, but that's why they are barbarians. There is nothing inherently dishonorable about breaking someone's arm or disabling them while they are on the ground; it might not be Knightly/gentlemanly, but they are barbarians.

I can continue this logic: There is nothing inherently dishonorable when attacking someone at their pit(since when is recall a 'get out of death free' card?), there is nothing inherently wrong with attacking an opponent that has weakened after he has stoped fighting(be it a mob, player, trap, whatever). There is nothing inherently wrong with forming an ambush for your opponent.

The part you quoted and the name barbarian refers solely to their fighting style, and does not detract from the notions of honor and self-reliance which hold true for all Warmasters. The sentence specifically before it states that the 'thuggish tactics' refers to their in-battle techniques; the paragraph after it stresses that this the principles and ideals of the Warmasters stills hold true to them, and that they simply use more methods than pure swordsmanship, including other parts of their body, the terrain, and magical assistance.

I disagree, it's not just about fighting style and it shouldn't be. It makes the two subcabals almost the same. I think you can be called honorable and self-reliant doing all the aforementioned things.

What is honor?

Honor is integrity: You keep your word and hold to it, even if it costs you something to do so.

Honor is equity: You fight your opponent by yourself, instead of jumping them with a pack of others. This also falls under the 'self-reliance' part of Warmaster. You do not lay in wait for when your opponent is already badly wounded or near-death from someone else to launch your attack.

Do you know what 'honor' is for a Knight? Then you know what it is for a Warmaster as well. They do share that much in common.

I agree for the most part, but let's remember that war is ultimately about annihilating your enemies. There are plenty of situations in war and in game where I think it would be justified in grouping and "underhanded" tactics. Warmasters will be honrable, but they won't let it hamstring them in combat. I consider them an extremely pragmatic bunch.

[Mudder]

Slightly off topic, but I feel like neutrals are slowly being forced into a subcategory of goodie RP, except they can't attack evils either. Heh.

[WagesofSin]

Oh and, while I'm at it, this whole "honor" argument we're having is teetering between what is IC honor and what is OOC honor. It's a pity that most of people only go by the latter when playing FL. Keep in in game I say! If the Roleplayed environment forces warmasters to do "dishonorable" things, then let them. It could be a great roleplay opportunity to allow some in game conflict between WM's that questions other WM behavior. Hard times call for hard measures. Sure they'd all like to be honorable, but you gotta do what you gotta do to survive. That's life, and it's what makes things interesting.

[Hegemon]

As I have had some time off, I've read this thread.

One thing sticks out for me, however. Chiefly because I mostly agree with a lot of what Raargant posts.

Originally Posted by Raargant

Kicking dirt into an opponent's eyes is, quite frankly, something each and every melee class does.

Reply: There's nothing stopping you from not using such an underhanded tactic IC, if you want to RP an "Honourable" fighter. Except of course that the rabid PKbase can/will/must take every advantage to survive.

I'm not going to break down the whole thing, but I will say that the Barbarian/Gladiator dynamic was/is/will be one of the more interesting things in the game and I really feel that Raar is picking and choosing with the helpfile in order to support his argument while ignoring other parts entirely.

[tassinvegeta]

Savant and Warmasters especially have always been one of the more difficult and more boring cabals due to its restrictive rp. Hence the reason few last long or play very long without dying from boredom. Hence the reason my last WM had such a colorful history.

Freedom > Restrictions Retention = Freedoms. I know my math sucks but I think you'll get the picture.

[Imoutgoodbye]

While the help file states what Warmasters, particularly Barbarians are, I have to ask, what takes precedence here? Cabal or Align/Ethos?

I see Lawful Goods sticking to the Warmaster beliefs, especially honor in regards to Barbarians as Raargant sees it.

Neutral Goods, same as above.

Chaotic Goods, I can see them bending things a bit in regard to evil aligned players.

I expect ALL Neutral aligns (including chaotic, yes) to adhere to this.

Lawful Evils should adhere to it.

Neutral Evils and Chaotic Evils would not.

Should cabal take precedence in this case over align/ethos, then Warmaster needs alignment restrictions.

EDIT: Am I crazy or are all my posts usually so stinking short? I think I might be simplify things too much.....

[Unknown Brother]

No one complained when I was deathmarking and skinning people on Loriss. WM leader at the time told me I was everything a barbarian should be, and gave me Elder. He was also neutral.