EFUPW Forums

Main Forums => Off-topic Discussion => Topic started by: Cerberus on September 18, 2009, 10:57:30 AM

Title: What class is he?
Post by: Cerberus on September 18, 2009, 10:57:30 AM
Watch this movie clip and tell me what class you think a guy like the one played by Vin Diesel is and why.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ARZRk7eiLY
 
I'm going to post a poll for it but if you have another idea besides one of the obvious please explain your reasoning.
 
There is a reason I'm asking this that I'll probably explain after there is a reasonable amount of response.
Title:
Post by: TheWastesAreFrozen on September 18, 2009, 11:54:45 AM
Not monk.
Title:
Post by: Disco on September 18, 2009, 12:07:28 PM
Diciplined like a fighter, but still nuts like a barbarian. I voted barbarian but perhaps I should have voted fighter.
Title:
Post by: Fliggin McButton on September 18, 2009, 12:14:58 PM
He's not a monk because while he may have been somewhat philosophical there, he is by no means wise or enlightened. Just speaking about what he knows. Furthermore, his fighting style is that of a street fighter, AKA brawler, not a disciplined martial art like a monk.

He's not a barbarian because he didn't rage out and just assault the guy like mad. His attacks were planned and calculated.

Therefore, if for no other reason than deduction, he is a fighter.
Title:
Post by: derfo on September 18, 2009, 12:30:16 PM
he is an actor and not a dungeons and dragons character nor a dungeons and dragons class
Title:
Post by: Halfbrood on September 18, 2009, 12:43:30 PM
i woudl voet bard bt i havnt wached teh vid. :)
Title:
Post by: TheWastesAreFrozen on September 18, 2009, 12:53:20 PM
I think he just may be a Vin Diesel, one who happens to be cock diesel.
Title:
Post by: Cerberus on September 18, 2009, 01:52:44 PM
Interesting so far... I was kinda wondering how many of you didn't count RBSD (//%22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality-based_self-defense%22) or things like Military Police USD (//%22http://www.mpuca.com/%22) as martial arts. I guess most people believe it's the color of the belt that makes the monk.
Title:
Post by: sylvyrdragon on September 18, 2009, 05:43:32 PM
For DnD purposes I would go Fighter with Weapon Spec. unarmed attack.  (may need to throw in a level of Monk in order to get the sweet gloves and such..)
Title:
Post by: Melons on September 18, 2009, 07:27:18 PM
Fighter.
Title:
Post by: TomBanana on September 18, 2009, 07:54:23 PM
I voted 'other' for he is multiclass. Here are he classes and why:

Ranger (favored enemy humans) - He has fought with so many humans and seems to be always seeking to fight them. He actually became specialized in it, knowing where he can hit to cause more damage.

Rogue - It seems he enjoys hitting on surprise (sneak attack), when the situation was apparently already taken care of, through intimidation (class skill for rogue) he stroke under surprise. He has also the feat 'thug' or improved initiative at that. The class Rogue could be substituted by Barbarian, giving him the taunt and intimidation, but he hardly demonstrated to enter rage in that scene.

Fighter - A bit of discipline and unarmed strike focus/specialization, plus a few feats he demonstrated there, as knock down for instance.

I did not include monk for his methods seem far from 'lawful', but that is just a style thing, I know some monks would fight a bit dirty, since knock down and hit the enemy prone is a monk thing to do. Also I find monks weak.


Horrible movie, by the way ...
Title:
Post by: lovethesuit on September 18, 2009, 08:03:09 PM
Easily, EASILY a Lawful Evil Monk. Not even a question in my mind.
Title:
Post by: Cerberus on September 18, 2009, 08:27:49 PM
Don't get me wrong, I love the sever, EFU/a rocks. But I've always wondered about the stereo-typing of certain classes that goes on. I do firmly believe that as long as everybody is playing by the same rules it's all fair so it certainly isn't something I'm bitching about but why does a monk have to be some type of Shaolin or karate kid? Why do druids have to care about the politics of man? Why can't a Paladin say convert or die?
 
To me the name of the class is nothing more then semantics. It's just my opinion but a character concept is what you make it. And if in that concept you want your PC to be fairly awesome with bare hands, fists or feet or even tooth, claw and tail there should be no reason you couldn't use a level or two of monk to get that point across. Who says there is no such thing as a kobold fighting style that would basically be a martial art? Who says a druid can't specialize in plants, animals or weather yet still stick firmly to the druidic oath?
 
Just a thought.  Something to debate perhaps...
.
Title:
Post by: TomBanana on September 18, 2009, 08:41:03 PM
Quote from: Cerberus;145623... Why can't a Paladin say convert or die? ...
.

Because they follow a strict Knightly code that make them the ultimate model of gentlemen, you should read it.
Title:
Post by: Cerberus on September 18, 2009, 08:56:25 PM
Quote from: TomBanana;145625Because they follow a strict Knightly code that make them the ultimate model of gentlemen, you should read it.

Hmm... So I guess you're saying a Paladin of Helm saying convert or die to a preist of Bane is not being very nice person... Perhaps just killing the unbeliever is more polite? just my opinion but giving them the option of life seems a bit more friendly then killing them. But what do I know... Off with thier heads! ;)
Title:
Post by: Kotenku on September 18, 2009, 09:18:20 PM
Paladins are sworn to uphold the laws of whatever society they reside in.

(If the society is completely evil, they will not reside there. If it is slightly corrupt, or redeemably crooked, Paladins may seek in varying ways (dependant on their deity) to correct the society.)

The point being: A Paladin, following their oaths, won't murder a Priest of Bane for refusing to convert.

Ugh, paladin discussions. :/
Title:
Post by: lovethesuit on September 18, 2009, 09:30:39 PM
Quote from: Cerberus;145623...Just a thought.  Something to debate perhaps...
.

You obviously hate the server.
Title:
Post by: Cerberus on September 18, 2009, 09:40:26 PM
heh... I love this server. I'm just playing devil's advocate.
 
Ok, I concede on the paladin thing. I always forget that lawful good means lawful stupid and the paladin must let the evil doer free to be evil yet again...
 
How about we talk about kobold monks? Or Druids that could care less about the politics in any city?
Title:
Post by: TomBanana on September 18, 2009, 09:48:51 PM
Quote from: Cerberus;145636... How about we talk about kobold monks? Or Druids that could care less about the politics in any city?...

As much as you try to turn this into an issue, it won't be possible. Kobolds are perfectly suited for monks, mainly because their are a lawful race, by alignment.

Druids ... Can they care less about politics now?
Title:
Post by: Cerberus on September 18, 2009, 09:52:53 PM
Quote from: TomBanana;145641As much as you try to turn this into an issue, it won't be possible. Kobolds are perfectly suited for monks, mainly because their are a lawful race, by alignment.
heh... I was "talked to" by a high ranking person of this server about about a kobold monk I once made. Was told it should have been an app because there is no such thing. (:twisted:;) devil's advocate again)
Quote from: EFUSLKee (RIP nogarD)
Lawful Evil - Halfing (Kobold)
Monk (2) - Rogue (4)
Title:
Post by: TomBanana on September 18, 2009, 09:58:43 PM
[shrugs] LE Kobold Monks, Of Serpent Guards Order, FTW!
Title:
Post by: Calculor on September 19, 2009, 02:49:06 AM
i think he is a druid because his head is shaved and aerodynamic and he has sun glasses on because he spends a lot of time outdoors
Title:
Post by: lovethesuit on September 19, 2009, 03:21:57 AM
Riddick was clearly a CE Ranger with FE: Humans and Monsters.
Title:
Post by: KRUNTO on September 19, 2009, 04:04:33 AM
LOL
Title:
Post by: Semli on September 19, 2009, 05:29:57 AM
DWARVES ARE IMMUNE TO POISON
Title:
Post by: TheMacPanther on September 19, 2009, 07:17:28 AM
Fighter/Rogue. It is obvious that he knows how to fight, but remember that rogue isn't only the sneaky halfling lockpick. The class encompasses everything from diplomats, assassins, thugs, trapspringers and many other departures each with their own moral code. Sneak attack is not a knife in the ribcage while the person is distracted, it is knowing how to fight dirty and exploit the situation for maximum effect eg. the random headbutt. Most definately not a barb as he never works up into a "rage" and not a monk purely because of the lack of enlightened spiritualism.

my 3 cents.
Title:
Post by: TomBanana on September 19, 2009, 07:48:06 AM
Quote from: TheMacPanther;145709Fighter/Rogue. It is obvious that he knows how to fight, but remember that rogue isn't only the sneaky halfling lockpick. The class encompasses everything from diplomats, assassins, thugs, trapspringers and many other departures each with their own moral code. Sneak attack is not a knife in the ribcage while the person is distracted, it is knowing how to fight dirty and exploit the situation for maximum effect eg. the random headbutt. Most definately not a barb as he never works up into a "rage" and not a monk purely because of the lack of enlightened spiritualism.

my 3 cents.

I'm with you there ... He centrally rolled an intimidation there (rogue skill), at first, I'm not sure why, cuz he ended up kicking the red neck's arse anyway ... Maybe some taunting ...
Title:
Post by: Cerberus on September 21, 2009, 04:03:25 PM
Hmph, I can't find a clip that actually show's her saying it. But the woman warrior fighting Xena in this video (//%22http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbCHbpc6myE%22) is a paladin. Which is obvious if you see the entire episode and not just the preview. She actually beats Xena in their first fight encounter and in the preview the people on their knees in a row ("I want to forgive you and love you all as brothers.") have to convert within three days or face the paladins sword and die. And she (the paladin) is tough enough to beat Xena, so basically they are given the option of convert or die.
 
I know it's just a Xena episode, but the theory of a paladin saying convert or die does not necessarily have to be against their code...
Title:
Post by: TomBanana on September 21, 2009, 08:03:49 PM
Aren't Priests the ones responsible for converting? I don't believe Paladins are entitled to preaching.
Title:
Post by: Cerberus on September 22, 2009, 12:27:02 PM
Quote from: quote by Forgotten Realms Wiki (//%22http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Faer%C3%BBn%22)
 
Few, if any paladins truly "choose" their career and becoming a paladin is more like answering a call to destiny. It is generally said that becoming a paladin is something that is either within one's nature or not and though an individual may reject the devine call that becons them, none can become a paladin that does not hear the call.
... .. .
Ardent paladins feel it is their sacred duty to represent the wrath of their god, much like an avenger. This extends to abondoning some of the caution and careful defense of most paladins and of varying paladin codes, throwing themselves into the fray with righteous zeal, in order to punish the heathens.
Can you say Jihad? ;)
Title:
Post by: RevengeIsADish on September 22, 2009, 04:13:01 PM
smite the infidel
Title:
Post by: TeufelHunden on September 22, 2009, 07:57:29 PM
Barbarian, if you watch the whole movie he totally rages out on that one guy with the gambling machines.
Title:
Post by: VonVonnen on September 22, 2009, 08:45:19 PM
The class is called Brawler.
Title:
Post by: Cerberus on September 23, 2009, 10:19:28 AM
Brawler, Hmm... Was that a base class in the 3.0 fighters handbook or something?
 
Anyway... Thats one of the things I meant to discuss/debate. How would you make some PC concepts. To me it's the concept that makes the character not the class names. If I wanted to make a brawler and had his 1st level be monk and 2nd and up be all fighter then he's a brawler, not a monk/fighter and saying I have to play him like some shaolin priest is just silly. Just because he has monk in him doesnt mean that's what he is, to me it's just part of the build. For instance take the brawler. Lets say he was the son of a tavern owner and born and raised living in a bar. By the age of 16 he knows more about the bar/tavern life than most people. He's watched and been in many bar brawls and knows how to take a hit and how to hurt people with his hands and feet. If you stay away from adding lots of skill points to monk skills, avoid things like shurikens and stick to the skills associated with this build he is NOT a monk/fighter, he's a brawler.
 
So saying things like there is no such thing as a kobold monk is just silly to me. I might even agree that there are no Shaolin kobolds, but who's to say there is no such thing as a kobold wildfighter (monk/ftr/rogue).
 
To me it's the concept that makes the character and restricting things that are mechanically possible kinda takes away from the creativity of the game.
 
Just because a PC named Tarzan has a single level of druid in him shouldn't mean he has to join every druid circle he runs across or care about the balance of politics in a nearby city. 1 level of druid, 1 level of barbarian the rest all ranger should be a Tarzan of the apes concept, not a druid/barb/rngr.
 
Ok, I'm rambling, I'll stfu and see if any of you understand what I'm talking about...