Coup

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

Have you ever even read Help Barbarian Foxx? Or do you just choose to stamp what you think is the right way to do something and condemn anyone else who thinks differently?

It was not me who said Barbs are supposed to be honorable Aulian. I just follow the rules give by the IMMs.

Just to stir things up, I think Council should be able to coup.

Thuggish is considered the way they fight, as described.

But that's not something I thought myself Aulian, I've been told by the immortals. If an immortal comes here and say, "Hey, barbs don't need to be honorable.", then you and Valsgarde right indeed, and I would gladly apologize.

Unless that happens, I will take what I've been told as a rule.

No offense to any imms but if they were to tell you that a Barb has to be as honorable as a glad then they might as well make the whole cabal glad with selectable skills.

Honor is a malleable ideal. What if I find it honorable to win every battle at every cost? Or that if I fight you and dont give it my all I feel like I'm dishonoring you and myself by not bringing my best?

Honor isnt a set set of rules. Its up to someones interpretation. Not wanting to ever loose a fight I would consider acceptable behaviour. Choosing to run to Daryth so your unthinking foe is attacked and you use it to kill him - thats Barbarian behaviour. Using sanctuary when they cant - Thats barb behaviour.

Winning at all costs? (Within the cabal mandated ganging/tagging rules) Barb behaviour.

Tip toeing around like a prissy little girl - Not barb behaviour.

Hence why I said the warmaster and its subcabals need a better description to begin with.

Warmasters - both Gladiator and Barbarians - are fairly proud to begin with. After all, they are the ones who are able to fight without cantrips and relying on theirt own abilities as veterans of the battlefield. They aren't exactly going to just let you run your mouth without doing some talking of their own - and if you didn't already notice ogres, giant and dwarves aren't so much big on words as they are maimings, beatings and beheadings

If you mouthed off to a Gladitor would you really expect a duel? My gladiators are only to happy to deathmark, kill and perhaps loot you. As a lesson not to disrespect the Warmasters and to teach you to be more self reliable by re-obtaining your armor.

If you mouthed off to a Barbarian, again, expect a deathmark, a slaying and more than likely them to rip your head off as a trophy and display it. They mightn't take your things but would almost certainly jump up and down on them until they were broken (read: in game terms, sacrificed). Don't expect too much but a stomped on bloody corpse and some shards fo metal, pottery and fur when you get back to the scene of the battle.

I think anyone will be hard pressed to make the argument that these reactions aren't good roleplay from a proud, short tempered veteran.

As for challenges - they aren't real battles. No one wants weapons cleaved, hellstreams melting equipment, sacrificing of disarmed weapons, cabal powers used then others don't have them, using of cps to heal all the time, leaving the area and running about and so on. It's a pretty artificial situation that gives some reace/classes huge advantages. I never take challenges too seriously due to this. Another reason challenge-for-rank sucks.

Personally, I've also never had an issue declining challenges from those who simply use the game mechanics to attempt to force a Warmaster to fight on their terms. Fail. I've been known to use ignore to stop people's bullsh!t (as the mortal WM leader no less). Of course, in these situations it wouldn't be fair not to give the person their dreamshot so I would usually arrange a deathmark for you. No need to thank me, its all part of the (not so) friendly L-A WM service reserved for such douche-baggery.

L-A

derail from original topic>

opinion of cabal>

I knew there was a reason I liked you L-A.

I knew there was a reason I liked you L-A.

Probably because you're a person of taste, class and respect

L-A

STUFF*

derail from original topic>

opinion of cabal>

Your tags are closed wrong. You might want to fix that before your opinion gets broken.

Your tags are closed wrong. You might want to fix that before your opinion gets broken.

:cool:

;D that was hit under the belt

A devastatingly accurate one since there still has been no discussion on the fact that beyond the issue of creating another "get rich quick" scheme he is also calling for a one sided bet. There is absolutely ZERO reason to put up your title for nothing. Now if you challenged me for WM L theoretically and I got 1000 CP for accepting regardless of outcome plus a bonus if I put you out... it makes sense. There needs to be respect for the title holder, not just the upstart.

facepalm

Whatever suits you best mate.

Haha I personally found out awhile ago that Foxx does have a difficult time understanding your point Valsgrade. In addition I believe what some people have difficulty understanding is the concept of honor.

1. honesty, fairness, **or **integrity in **one's beliefs **and actions: a man of honor.

I bolded the following:

Honesty or Fairness: This is a matter of perspective. Someone can be honest but fair to a certain degree and vice versa. There are varying levels especially depending upon your alignment.

In one's Belief's and Actions: Again is a big matter of perspective that has various levels.

I'd imagine a Knights level of honor to be a bit different than a Barbarians. Though outright going against your word should be plan out a preach of rp. But adding in ambiguities and loopholes as a Barbarian should certainly be alright. I loved seeing them in the Xena tv shows and other Barbaric movies.

Waterworld

Deacon "Did I say I wouldn't kill you?"

Victim "you did you did!"

Deacon "oh shoot." Hands gun to right hand man to kill him instead. Mwhahahah!

Xena vs Barbarian - Battle for the protection vs annihilation of a town. Conditions: Weapons are staffs. You lose if you touch the ground or are killed.

Barbarian cheats by stepping on the heads of his men to gain a victory (since he didn't say anything about that in the rules its not going against **his **version honor)

Xena eventually wins the battle and chooses not to kill him.

Barbarian kills his own man for trying to kill Xena then, then says "a deals a deal" then leaves the town for good.

In fl people woulda called the Barbarian dishonorable in two different situations even though he is not.