Its all the rage...

[Scorpion13]

So one of my players, a barbarian, was fighting a gorups of shemite mercenaries last night. He fumbled bad enough that he dropped his tulwar on the ground. The next time he was up, he said he wanted to pick up the tulwar...but he was still raging. I eventually gave him the benefit of the doubt, since the book didnt say anything one way or the other, but for a while, I contended that in a rage, a barbarian wouldnt be thinking clearly enough to stop fighting an pick his weapon up.


Is this calrified in another book, or in the core book, or is it just a judgement call?

 

[urdinaran]

I'm not sure what the book says (I'm at work) but in staying with the spirit of the game, if your player uses an action to pick up his weapon have him make an Int test modified by his rage, if he fails he picks up some random weapon or object. Seems to me that Conan wasn't too picky what he used to cave someones head in. I warn my players not to spend too many feats on specific weapons as they may not have them at any given time.

 

[Turim]

As always, the DM is free to rule things the way he wants, but nothing in the rules prevent your player from picking up his weapon. In my opinion he could also run away from the fight. Note that unlike in D&D he could end the fighting-madness without becoming fatigued.

 

[Raven Blackwell]

Hmm, in my last game, one of my PCs during a battle with a vampiric sorceress accidently got exposed to a dose of Grey Lotus and failed his save- putting himself in Fighting Madness. A sorcerer himself, he expended ever Power Point he had in flashy attacks and attacked her blindly with his bare hands when they ran out- not even bothering to use the Scimitar he had tucked into his belt earlier. I ruled that this was legit- using Sorcery was secodn nature to him and would be considered a 'readied' weapon but his frenzied mind might forget the Scimitar. The vampire- short on hit points and down a few quarts- gladly joined a Grapple with the sorcerer and tore open a couple of veins while he vainly tried to snap her neck. To make a long story short his teammates managed to get the vampire off him but not before he was down to 4 Con via blood loss. ["Whoa, a little dizzy here..." 8)]. I ruled that the combination of blood loss and shock would knock the sorcerer out so he slept out the rest of the Grey Lotus's duration. They decapitated the vampire before I got to thinking how a vampire would react after drinking Grey Lotus tainted blood...

Raven

 

[Voltumna]

i dont' think a fighting madness would prevent someone from picking up his weapon. in his murderous rampage i think the barbarian would try to get his hands on whatever would serve him best to slay his foes. either he picks his own weapon on the floor, or he might try disarming one of his opponents, even improvising weapons, and if nothing is available then he goes in with claw and theeth, unless that would put him at great disadvantage. he is in a killing rage, but he is not stupid because of it. his mobility feats would serve him good against AOOs he might provoque if he does not have the proper feats, and also his versatility.

the sorcerer: i think he could cast spells that don't require material components that need to be manipulated, nor those that require a focus. the fighting madness feat says that you can't perform actions that require patience or concentration, and his rampage wouldn't allow him to manipulate components carefully. also since he can't concentrat he would be provoquing AOOs if casting in combat, since to avoid the AOOs would require him to make a concentration check. if he has combat expertise he couldn't use it either.

as an optional rule for sorcerers that fall into the effect of the grey lotus, i think i would grant him the benefits of power magic attack instead, and add a +1 to the bonus granted by the rule of success.

 

[Korppis]

I don't like the idea that sorcerer in fighting madness would be able to cast spells... After all, casting a spell does need consentratiou, doesn't it. Even the skill "consentration" is supposed to be used in spellcastig situations where your concentration may break.

IMO, sorcerer in fighting madness will be like everyone else, going totally berserk and trying to bash his enemies into a bloody pulp in a melee... Any spellcasting would be too sophisticated in a situation like this.
OR
Maybe he will just totally lose his control and launch his Defensive Blast (which IIRC was an ability, not a spell, and didin't need a concentration checks if you got wounded)

 

[Raven Blackwell]

It depends on how you see magic I guess. Some people see it like science- something requiring careful and delicate planning and ritual. Other see it as an instinctive Art that draws from a person's soul. I fall in the latter. Anger fueled sorcery is a staple of fanatsy fiction [and I've pulled it off myself RL] as the emotional energy feeds the magic, but tends to burn out the sorcerer rather rapidly. In fact the sorcerer literally 'pushed it' down to the point of -4 PP, forcing him sacrifice a couple of guards later on to replenish his ability to do magic. In the above example, the sorcerer was one prone to using flashy attack spells like elemental touch and elemental blast [See the topic "Raven's Rules for Sorcery v 1.1" for descriptions of the spells] at every available instance. Thus when he started blasting everything in sight, it seemed very In Character [IC]. The fact he also leapt into a pit after the vampire to cast a elemental touch- which has a range of Touch- also was very IC for a sorcerer in Fighting Madness from my POV. Also, I didn't force him to not use his Scimitar- he chose not to use it myself. As you can probably tell he's an intense RPer, as opposed to a power gamer.

As for compentents somantic gestures and words- I don''t use them. Seems too silly and too much bookkeeping involved. Magic isn't like a chemistry class- the Power comes from your Essence not a bunch of minerals or dead animal or plant tissue topped with meaningless gestures and words.

Also, I don't use Defensive Blast in my games- I replaced it with Final Strike [Detailed in "Raven's Rules"] to disciourage the "suicide bomber" tactic of combat.

Raven

 

[Sutek]

There goes Raven...selling his deviant Conan RPG again...

lol

Anyway, I guess I missed something somewhere, but did you say you were playing the Conan RPG? The Barbarian was raging? He fumbled and dropped his tulwar?

Barbarians in Conan don't have the ability to "rage". Neither are there any rules for critical failures on rolls to hit or rules for fumbles.

Now, with that smart alec comment out of the way, if you're house ruling stuff anyway, just do what you feel is appropriate and remain consistant. If you tell the Barbarian that he has to keep attacking as long as he rages, well, dropping his sword at an untimely point in the combat is one of the major drawbacks because he's too enraged to pick it back up.

Alternatively, I would have let him use a fate point ot pick it up or make it clear that he is weaponless unti lall his foes are dead or he disarms one. A sword falling to the ground in a scuffle like that would get kicked around and be very hard to pick up during the fight. Stick to your guns and make him think of something clever.

 

[Damien]

Like Sutek said -- if you're already using houserules, then really it's your call.

The 'official' ruling is that there's no rule in the core book that says a disarmed bloodlusting psychopath does not have the presence of mind to pick his weapon up. As a matter of fact, it seems very reasonable. Even in a blind rage, you'd have the presence of mind to grab the most dangerous thing in the room.

The only rule I'd enforce here would be that the barbarian must pick up the weapon -closest- to him, so it won't necessarily be -his- weapon that he picks up. Further, I'd probably say there's a flat 50% chance that if a non-weapon is right next to his weapon, like a rock or a chair, he picks that up instead.


If you want precedent - I can think of two examples off-hand.

The first is Conan. The quintessential murderous psychopath. I don't recall a time when Conan simply ignored any and all weapons to bash someone in with his fists. Even in his rampages, Conan was intelligent enough, and had enough presence of mind, to pick up weapons, or even retreat.

Another good precedent is Achilles -- I'm sure you're familiar with him. He was said to go into a murderous frenzy during combat. But he still had the presence of mind to throw multiple spears and draw a sword when his spears were spent.

Nothing about the various d20 Fury/Frenzy/Bloodlust/etc abilities ever say that 'rampaging' means 'stupid, brutish, and completely without sense.'

 

[Belkregos]

I don’t think the mindless barbarian is the feel for Conan, as stated before the rules don’t seem to back it up, I cant find anywhere in the rules where it states the barbarian cant think when he is in fighting madness or crimson mist,
then there’s the Conan stories, the barbarian seems to be bold more because of confidence than mindless abandon or lack of reason,
the barbarian has learned to rely on himself and to push himself to limits more so than civilized men or at leas civilized men have forgoten, fighting madness and crimson mist seem (imho) to be more the case when the barbarian draws from that strength,
The barbarian has a stronger connection to his primal instincts but he’s not overwhelmed by them he uses them

 

[Scorpion13]

There goes Raven...selling his deviant Conan RPG again...

lol

Anyway, I guess I missed something somewhere, but did you say you were playing the Conan RPG? The Barbarian was raging? He fumbled and dropped his tulwar?

Barbarians in Conan don't have the ability to "rage". Neither are there any rules for critical failures on rolls to hit or rules for fumbles.

Now, with that smart alec comment out of the way, if you're house ruling stuff anyway, just do what you feel is appropriate and remain consistant. If you tell the Barbarian that he has to keep attacking as long as he rages, well, dropping his sword at an untimely point in the combat is one of the major drawbacks because he's too enraged to pick it back up.

Alternatively, I would have let him use a fate point ot pick it up or make it clear that he is weaponless unti lall his foes are dead or he disarms one. A sword falling to the ground in a scuffle like that would get kicked around and be very hard to pick up during the fight. Stick to your guns and make him think of something clever.

Um, you are familiar with the feat Fighting Madness, arent you? That was what I meant when I said rage.

I guess you do have ponts on this, but the rational behind this was that my player is playing a berseker, even to the point of refusing to wear armor. I thought that if you were in such a rage that you shrugged of axe blows, maybe you wouldnt have the presense of mind to stop and pick up a weapon. But yeah, youre right.

Anywho, I kept the critical fumbles in the game just o make combat more interesting. That, and I allowed auto-confirmed criticals.

 

[Sutek]

Alright. I was a bit sarcastic, but you didn't actually say "fighting madness" anywhere, now did ya? :wink:

D&D Barbarians can Rage and since your scenario involved other house rules I assumed you were either new or house-ruling all over the place anyway. Didn't mean to offend.

Anyhoo, I'd say the caveat that is in that feat indicating that the enraged individual cannot used skills or abilities that require concentration would be, maybe, slightly enough ammo to argue that pausing in the middle of a fight to pick up one's weapon was out of bounds. It doesn't say anywhere that Fighting Madness precludes other actions, but not being able to concentrate does sort of imply a certain ammount of focus on bashing and slashing.

However, by the rules, Fighting Madness doesn't disallow the use of other combat feats like Improved Feint or Intricate Swordplay, the latter of which more than implies a bit of finesse rather than simply whacking away.

I'd do one of two things if I were you: (A) Just tell him to look into other feats like Brawl and Iproved Disarm and be prepared to go at it with no weapon if it happens again. There's plenty of ways to be prepared for that occasion. Or (B) Write out the actual viability of picking up one's dropped weapon in a combat. This can be a simple addition to your current "fumble" mechanics (like a rolling a die to determine exactly how badly the weapon is out of reach after the fumble).

Personally, I'd have gone with the fate point expendature in the moment. If he spent the fate point to hang onto it to cancle the fumble, than that makes the most sense. Alternatively, if he didn't spend one to keep the tulwar in his hands, I'd award him one for fighting on without it until nearby opponents were defeated if it was a crucial battle in your campaign.

8)


BTW: What is an "auto-confirmed critical"?

 

[Scorpion13]

Auto confirming criticals means that if you roll a critical, it is a critical. No rolling again to confirm it. Of course, only allow this if you roll a natural 20. If you roll say a 18 or 19, and your weapon criticals on that, it isnt automatically confirmed. Only a natural 20.

 

[Belkregos]

Auto confirming criticals means that if you roll a critical, it is a critical. No rolling again to confirm it. Of course, only allow this if you roll a natural 20. If you roll say a 18 or 19, and your weapon criticals on that, it isnt automatically confirmed. Only a natural 20.

hehehe, we have the same house rule, just that we call it
"a 20 is a 20!!" 8)

el 20 es 20!!

 

[Sutek]

That's pretty insane given that a 20 is always a hit, regardless of DV, not to mention the low Massive Damage threshold and higer Sneak Attack potential damage in the Conan RPG. I wouldn't do that if I were you, guys. Danage is dangerous enough as it is, but then again, it's your game and the objective is to have fun...

:?

 

[Scorpion13]

Hey, what can I say? I likes me Conan deadly... 8)

 

[René]

That's pretty insane given that a 20 is always a hit, regardless of DV, not to mention the low Massive Damage threshold and higer Sneak Attack potential damage in the Conan RPG. I wouldn't do that if I were you, guys. Danage is dangerous enough as it is, but then again, it's your game and the objective is to have fun...

:?

I agree with Sutek: a fellow GM houseruled this in his D&D campaign - and ended with one PC after the other going to the Outer Planes. Sure, the Hyborian Age is not about daisy flowers, but maybe it's better to try such a rule in an one-shot scenario before killing beloved PCs with a rich background in the main campaign.

But after all, this is your game.

 

[Raven Blackwell]

[deleted]

 

[Sutek]

Man...woman...whatever.
Still...a little touchy, doncha think?

Note the internet lingo: lol

It means the comment was a joke.
lol = laugh out loud

Take a pill and maybe that'll help you figure out who is the "bitter and immature individual".

...sheesh...

:shock:

Next time you feel a "fighting frenzy" coming on, PM me. Don't crash a perfectly good thread to "get your rant on". :?

 

[Scorpion13]

That's pretty insane given that a 20 is always a hit, regardless of DV, not to mention the low Massive Damage threshold and higer Sneak Attack potential damage in the Conan RPG. I wouldn't do that if I were you, guys. Danage is dangerous enough as it is, but then again, it's your game and the objective is to have fun...

:?

I agree with Sutek: a fellow GM houseruled this in his D&D campaign - and ended with one PC after the other going to the Outer Planes. Sure, the Hyborian Age is not about daisy flowers, but maybe it's better to try such a rule in an one-shot scenario before killing beloved PCs with a rich background in the main campaign.

But after all, this is your game.

Hey, Id just like to point out that they have just as much chance of killing somebody I had spent alot of time working on in one hit too. The door swings both ways.