[3.5] Undead Barbarians

[Thurbane]

It's generally accepted that undead Barbarians (or other classes with similar abilities) have a reduced length for the Rage, having no Con score (i.e. a flat 3 rounds, rather than 3 rounds + Con modifier).

I've seen a few people argue or speculate that undead use their Cha in place of Con to determine the duration of their Rage, but I've not seen anyone produce a rules citation for this. The closest rule I've seen is this:


Charisma: A creature’s Charisma modifier affects the save DC for any spell-like abilities it has. Use Charisma for anything pitting the creature’s will against an opponent, such as gaze attacks, charms, compulsions, and energy drain effects. Also use Charisma for any DC that normally would be based on an ability score the creature does not have. For example, undead have no Constitution score, so any poison attack an undead creature has would use Charisma to determine the save DC.

...however that rule is specifically related to calculating DCs, and there is no DC associated with the ability to Rage.

I think I may have found the elusive rules citation to back up the Cha in place of Con debate:


Barbarian: There are not many barbarians among the undead, but gangs of barbarian ghouls and ghasts are used as shock troops by the more powerful lords of Xaphan. A raging undead barbarian does not gain an increase in Constitution (or anything dependent upon Constitution such as hit points or Fortitude saves) but uses its normal Charisma modifier instead of its Constitution modifier to determine how long a rage lasts. Because undead are immune to fatigue, an undead barbarian is not penalized when a rage ends.

...so there you go. Take it for what it's worth. I suppose the counter argument could be that this only applies in a Ghostwalk campaign setting. Still, I think it's a pretty solid citation.

Thoughts?

- T

[Venger]

my gravetouched ghoul barbarian thanks you kindly.

[ATHATH]

Does this work for those variant rages as well?

Being an Necropolitan Barbarian might be very tempting if you have a variant rage that doesn't boost CON...

[Zanos]

Does this work for those variant rages as well?

Being an Necropolitan Barbarian might be very tempting if you have a variant rage that doesn't boost CON...
There's a bit of cheese with rage variants that don't boost con where you can take the Ettercap Berseker feat to set the bonus to +6, regardless of what it was before.

For undead though, I think this would apply to most variant rages. It definitely works with whirling frenzy, because whirling frenzy specifically modifies what happens when you enter a rage.

[KillianHawkeye]

Considering the stereotype of Barbarians with abysmally poor Charisma scores, I'm not sure if this rule helps or hurts undead Barbarians.... :smallamused:

[Zanos]

Considering the stereotype of Barbarians with abysmally poor Charisma scores, I'm not sure if this rule helps or hurts undead Barbarians.... :smallamused:
Losing con was already hurting undead barbarians, since they already get a d12 and hp is pretty much their major resource.

I think most undead templates that keep sentience have a cha bump, necropolitian being the exception.

[KillianHawkeye]

Losing con was already hurting undead barbarians, since they already get a d12 and hp is pretty much their major resource.

I understand that, but it isn't relevant to how long their rage lasts. An undead Barbarian with a 7 in Charisma would only be able to rage for one round following this rule. Considering how rage was designed to boost its own duration via the Con increase, it's probable that they never considered any practical cases of a rage actually lasting fewer than three rounds.


I think most undead templates that keep sentience have a cha bump, necropolitian being the exception.

I suppose any undead that has a special attack with a Saving Throw of any kind was designed with a positive Charisma modifier. That probably does cover the majority of them.

[Thurbane]

From a stat assignment POV for an Undead Barbarian: you can dump Wis, since you're immune most things requiring a Will save, Int isn't really that important; Con is a non-ability, so put your lowest "score" there. Means you can Prioritize Str > Dex > Cha > Int > Wis > Con

[KillianHawkeye]

From a stat assignment POV for an Undead Barbarian: you can dump Wis, since you're immune most things requiring a Will save, Int isn't really that important; Con is a non-ability, so put your lowest "score" there. Means you can Prioritize Str > Dex > Cha > Int > Wis > Con

I'm coming at this from the viewpoint that the character's stats were assigned before they became undead. Since, y'know, that's usually the case.

[Venger]

I'm coming at this from the viewpoint that the character's stats were assigned before they became undead. Since, y'know, that's usually the case.

why would you assume that? if it's a pc who isn't starting at 1, they'd stat out for endgame so build in for necropolitan or whatever.

[Morcleon]

why would you assume that? if it's a pc who isn't starting at 1, they'd stat out for endgame so build in for necropolitan or whatever.

And even if they are starting at 1, if they're aiming for Necropolitan, they'd likely just suffer through the first few levels with a low Con (or I would, at least).

[Thurbane]

I'm coming at this from the viewpoint that the character's stats were assigned before they became undead. Since, y'know, that's usually the case.

Fair call: but in that kind of game, your character is probably going to get more drawbacks from being undead than benefits. If you invested a lot of your point buy/allocation in Con, then suddenly have no Con score, it's likely to hurt your character build/concept quite a bit.

Quite a few people build characters with the goal of ultimately becoming a Necropolitan or Lich.

[KillianHawkeye]

why would you assume that? if it's a pc who isn't starting at 1, they'd stat out for endgame so build in for necropolitan or whatever.

Why would you assume they're not starting at level 1? :smallconfused:


Quite a few people build characters with the goal of ultimately becoming a Necropolitan or Lich.

Maybe, but most characters don't plan on dying and coming back as horrible abominations against nature. It's even less likely for Barbarians, of all classes, to plan for this.

Secondly, a character's ability scores are determined before their class is chosen, and their class is generally chosen before they are subjected to anything that could make them undead (assuming they're retaining the class they had in life, which I suppose isn't the case for all types of undead).

Finally, some undead characters have become undead against their will, because lots of undead create spawn from their victims, and if it's some necromancer coming along you're already dead and can't object. Really, expecting a character's ability scores to be perfect for becoming undead is what's unlikely. Making a character with the intention of having it be an undead Barbarian from the start is the exception IMO, not the norm.



In other words, you guys are looking at this from the player's perspective and I'm looking at it from the character's perspective.

[Venger]

Why would you assume they're not starting at level 1? :smallconfused:

Maybe, but most characters don't plan on dying and coming back as horrible abominations against nature. It's even less likely for Barbarians, of all classes, to plan for this.

Secondly, a character's ability scores are determined before their class is chosen, and their class is generally chosen before they are subjected to anything that could make them undead (assuming they're retaining the class they had in life, which I suppose isn't the case for all types of undead).

Finally, some undead characters have become undead against their will, because lots of undead create spawn from their victims, and if it's some necromancer coming along you're already dead and can't object. Really, expecting a character's ability scores to be perfect for becoming undead is what's unlikely. Making a character with the intention of having it be an undead Barbarian from the start is the exception IMO, not the norm.



In other words, you guys are looking at this from the player's perspective and I'm looking at it from the character's perspective.


Because that's how you build characters for this game.

Prcs, feats, etc all have exacting specifications for what you need to do ahead of time to qualify for stuff. As a result, of you want to get into x class or take y feat, you pretty much need to plan out your build stub from the beginning. it's really hard to just fall into stuff in this system.


templates are things you will plan out for your character ahead of time. in my experience, the gm will not suddenly apply weird templates to your character, especially stuff that changes your type and drastically alters how the rules apply to you, such as necropolitan.

since we're talking about PCs, sure, we'll assume we're talking about undead templates that allow you to retain class levels.

sure, some undead such as shadows are turned unwillingly.

no one said anything about expecting all undead to have perfect abilities, but if you are speccing to build an undead barbarian and don't have to suffer through levels 1 and 2, you're going to dump con so you can put your points where they actually matter

undead barbarians are certainly rare, but thanks to this trick, they're certainly more viable.

we're looking at it from the players' pov because the player designs a character and picks their class levels.

[Rhyltran]

Why would you assume they're not starting at level 1? :smallconfused:



Maybe, but most characters don't plan on dying and coming back as horrible abominations against nature. It's even less likely for Barbarians, of all classes, to plan for this.

Secondly, a character's ability scores are determined before their class is chosen, and their class is generally chosen before they are subjected to anything that could make them undead (assuming they're retaining the class they had in life, which I suppose isn't the case for all types of undead).

Finally, some undead characters have become undead against their will, because lots of undead create spawn from their victims, and if it's some necromancer coming along you're already dead and can't object. Really, expecting a character's ability scores to be perfect for becoming undead is what's unlikely. Making a character with the intention of having it be an undead Barbarian from the start is the exception IMO, not the norm.



In other words, you guys are looking at this from the player's perspective and I'm looking at it from the character's perspective.

If you want to roleplay it's simple. You're a barbarian with a naturally high charisma. Your barbarian may not plan to die and become undead but here's the thing. As the player you are the invisible hand that guides the character. While the character, again, may not have plans to die, you the player have plans to set into motion their death and their eventual rise into undeath. You also happen to play a character who's personality doesn't make being undead incompatible and suddenly their natural charisma becomes a great boon in their undeath state. The barbarian may not have made the greatest barbarian in life (but due to his mindset and temperament he still became one.) but now he's an amazing undead barbarian.

[KillianHawkeye]

Okay, well I am in disagreement on most of those points.

You can absolutely play out characters without planning every feat and class choice in advance. And we are not just talking about PCs. NPCs are subject to this rule as well. I know it's possible for a player to plan a character to eventually become an undead (or to start out that way), but you guys are acting like that's the only thing that matters. Let me tell you, it's not the only thing.

The idea of a character with poor Constitution and great Charisma becoming a Barbarian and just luckily becoming an undead is certainly a viable concept, but you have to accept that it isn't always going to be the default choice because not all undead Barbarians are planned in advance. And also, low Con high Cha is a pretty rare stat spread for Barbarians. It's actually kind of the opposite of what people expect Barbarians to have.

[Zanos]

Un-un-deading isn't too hard if you want your constitution back.

[ATHATH]

You do realize that becoming a Necropolitan is a planned form of undeath, right? You even have to send an application letter(!).

Also, Stormwind Fallacy much?

[Guizonde]

Because that's how you build characters for this game.

templates are things you will plan out for your character ahead of time. in my experience, the gm will not suddenly apply weird templates to your character, especially stuff that changes your type and drastically alters how the rules apply to you, such as necropolitan.

since we're talking about PCs, sure, we'll assume we're talking about undead templates that allow you to retain class levels.

no one said anything about expecting all undead to have perfect abilities, but if you are speccing to build an undead barbarian and don't have to suffer through levels 1 and 2, you're going to dump con so you can put your points where they actually matter

undead barbarians are certainly rare, but thanks to this trick, they're certainly more viable.

we're looking at it from the players' pov because the player designs a character and picks their class levels.

psycho dm's can and will. my beloved halfling paladin (perfect tarpit build, by the way) was not to the gm's taste. he considered halfling paladins to be "silly" and "non-canon" (yes, i know about the dragonlance halfling paladin order, but he denied they existed in 2e). he was frustrated that her background checked out and that she was a force multiplier for the group. real-life shenanigans happen (gm gets a girlfriend, he kicks out his roommate...), i come back to the game, and he tells me with a grin on his face that my halfling paladin is undead, with a TN alignment. and amnesia. i may have said bad words in abundance.

after admitting that that was a **** move on his part, he allowed me to reroll her levels for a level 5 necropolitan only if it fit her existing fluff. so i've got a halfling with charisma through the roof, a poor strength score, good wisdom, and high dex who used to cast spells while using martial weapons. it was logical to go the barbarian route. as far as rerolls go, an angry amnesic halfling with an axe to grind made for a very interesting barb3/sorc2. just to troll the psycho dm, i played her like a ranger or rogue. basically, batman with fireballs and machetes. my dm regretted the time when i was only a simple paladin on a pony, and promptly gave me the sheet, kicked her out of the game and forced me to reroll something that fit his taste better.

i can't for the life of me remember where i saw that in necropolitan cases charisma became constitution, but i read heroes of horror cover to cover, that and the book of vile darkness, that's all i remember.


tl;dr: your points are valid, you forgot to factor psycho dm's and idiots power-tripping to change pc's out of game to fit "their vision of what roleplaying is".

[Rhyltran]

You do realize that becoming a Necropolitan is a planned form of undeath, right? You even have to send an application letter(!).

Also, Stormwind Fallacy much?

This too. Another thing is not all barbarians are the same. Chaotic Evil and Neutral Evil barbarians may feel undeath makes them the best at smashing things really hard. Maybe you're also playing a barbarian who just doesn't want to die?

[Morcleon]

psycho dm's can and will. my beloved halfling paladin (perfect tarpit build, by the way) was not to the gm's taste. he considered halfling paladins to be "silly" and "non-canon" (yes, i know about the dragonlance halfling paladin order, but he denied they existed in 2e). he was frustrated that her background checked out and that she was a force multiplier for the group. real-life shenanigans happen (gm gets a girlfriend, he kicks out his roommate...), i come back to the game, and he tells me with a grin on his face that my halfling paladin is undead, with a TN alignment. and amnesia. i may have said bad words in abundance.

after admitting that that was a **** move on his part, he allowed me to reroll her levels for a level 5 necropolitan only if it fit her existing fluff. so i've got a halfling with charisma through the roof, a poor strength score, good wisdom, and high dex who used to cast spells while using martial weapons. it was logical to go the barbarian route. as far as rerolls go, an angry amnesic halfling with an axe to grind made for a very interesting barb3/sorc2. just to troll the psycho dm, i played her like a ranger or rogue. basically, batman with fireballs and machetes. my dm regretted the time when i was only a simple paladin on a pony, and promptly gave me the sheet, kicked her out of the game and forced me to reroll something that fit his taste better.

i can't for the life of me remember where i saw that in necropolitan cases charisma became constitution, but i read heroes of horror cover to cover, that and the book of vile darkness, that's all i remember.


tl;dr: your points are valid, you forgot to factor psycho dm's and idiots power-tripping to change pc's out of game to fit "their vision of what roleplaying is".

Those are probably games you should leave. If the DM is that bad to just straight up change your character with no warning and (even after admitting it was a mistake) refuses to let you retcon it, that's a game you should probably leave. Bad DMs make any sort of argument irrelevant because they really shouldn't be DMing in the first place.

[Guizonde]

Those are probably games you should leave. If the DM is that bad to just straight up change your character with no warning and (even after admitting it was a mistake) refuses to let you retcon it, that's a game you should probably leave. Bad DMs make any sort of argument irrelevant because they really shouldn't be DMing in the first place.

oh don't worry, i most definitely left that trainwreck of a group. hell, i actually managed to get a friend from the same table onboard for a different campaign with other players. same 5 players for nigh on 4 years straight, taking turns dm'ing.

i usually tell that story to warn newbies about bad dm's. i think i posted it on here a few years ago in the "psycho dm" thread and the general consensus was indeed "high level psycho dm that you should run away from really fast". the fact we were talking about undead barbarians and if undeadification is planned or not was too perfect to pass up talking about an unplanned "incident".

oh, and the only reason he admitted he was in the wrong was because his gf and a few friends called him out on it. never apologized for it, seeing as how my character "wasn't really dead".

i'll say one thing, though. normally, gestalt characters are broken to begin with, but for fun, i did roll her up to 5th level as a barb5//sorc5, and having to rely only on dex and cha made for a really broken all-rounder gamebreaker. all that because in the necropolitan case, i'm pretty sure it's stated that indeed con becomes cha.

[Venger]

psycho dm's can and will. my beloved halfling paladin (perfect tarpit build, by the way) was not to the gm's taste. he considered halfling paladins to be "silly" and "non-canon" (yes, i know about the dragonlance halfling paladin order, but he denied they existed in 2e). he was frustrated that her background checked out and that she was a force multiplier for the group. real-life shenanigans happen (gm gets a girlfriend, he kicks out his roommate...), i come back to the game, and he tells me with a grin on his face that my halfling paladin is undead, with a TN alignment. and amnesia. i may have said bad words in abundance.

after admitting that that was a **** move on his part, he allowed me to reroll her levels for a level 5 necropolitan only if it fit her existing fluff. so i've got a halfling with charisma through the roof, a poor strength score, good wisdom, and high dex who used to cast spells while using martial weapons. it was logical to go the barbarian route. as far as rerolls go, an angry amnesic halfling with an axe to grind made for a very interesting barb3/sorc2. just to troll the psycho dm, i played her like a ranger or rogue. basically, batman with fireballs and machetes. my dm regretted the time when i was only a simple paladin on a pony, and promptly gave me the sheet, kicked her out of the game and forced me to reroll something that fit his taste better.

i can't for the life of me remember where i saw that in necropolitan cases charisma became constitution, but i read heroes of horror cover to cover, that and the book of vile darkness, that's all i remember.


tl;dr: your points are valid, you forgot to factor psycho dm's and idiots power-tripping to change pc's out of game to fit "their vision of what roleplaying is".
You've got me there. "most gms" or "good gms" or "reasonable gms" would have probably been a more accurate thing to say.

[Thurbane]

...so, my little rules citation find sparked a debate I really wasn't expecting. :smalltongue:

[KillianHawkeye]

You do realize that becoming a Necropolitan is a planned form of undeath, right? You even have to send an application letter(!).

Okay, but we aren't just talking about Necropolitans here. :smallsigh:


Also, Stormwind Fallacy much?

Not at all. :smallannoyed:

[SangoProduction]

Not at all. :smallannoyed:

Well, your big problem seems to be "You are planning, as the player, to become undead, therefore you are not role playing," in as explicit terms as possible. As a third party observer, this seems to be what you're getting at.

Just saying "No" doesn't really add anything. At best it says "I don't think I am" or "Don't call me out." But, of course, this is not explicit. So, the best thing to happen is that you fully, and explicitly explain your position.

[Zanos]

Okay, but we aren't just talking about Necropolitans here. :smallsigh:
I'm honestly struggling to think of methods to become undead against your will that would leave any character in a playable state anyway, as most of those feature some kind of mind control or drastic changes in personality towards "kill all meatbags." Even if that wasn't part of your package deal, most forced undead templates are bad for pretty much every character and you'd try to have it removed ASAP.

[KillianHawkeye]

Well, your big problem seems to be "You are planning, as the player, to become undead, therefore you are not role playing," in as explicit terms as possible.

No, I never said anyone wasn't roleplaying. My only point is that not all undead Barbarians will have had stats planned out for the purpose of being an undead Barbarian. You can do that if you wish, but realistically it makes sense that some character exist who didn't. Those are the characters I'm thinking about.


I'm honestly struggling to think of methods to become undead against your will that would leave any character in a playable state anyway, as most of those feature some kind of mind control or drastic changes in personality towards "kill all meatbags." Even if that wasn't part of your package deal, most forced undead templates are bad for pretty much every character and you'd try to have it removed ASAP.

Then you're failing to realize that having a less than playable character is totally an option. Maybe, as you say, it's only a temporary situation, but that's beside the point. Also, we aren't just talking about Player Characters. The rule applies equally to NPCs who are totally down for killing meatbags.

I'm honestly struggling to understand this apparent collective refusal to admit that unoptimized characters exist and are just as valid as optimized ones. We are discussing this rule in a vacuum, and seeing how it impacts unoptimized characters is a completely valid line of discussion that, for some reason, nobody but myself is at all interested in. :smallconfused:

I get that this is, to a certain extent, an optimization-centric forum, but please stop acting like unoptimized play doesn't ever happen. Are you all unwilling to discuss other play styles?

[Thurbane]

I was only pointing out a rules citation that may be beneficial to some players, and DMs for NPCs.

I DM far more than I play - the fact that I can now have undead who can Rage for more than 3 rounds is actually quite convenient for me.

...if using Cha for Rage duration instead of Con is harmful to your character...maybe don't point out the line in a relatively obscure 3.0 book to the DM?

[Zanos]

No, I never said anyone wasn't roleplaying. My only point is that not all undead Barbarians will have had stats planned out for the purpose of being an undead Barbarian. You can do that if you wish, but realistically it makes sense that some character exist who didn't. Those are the characters I'm thinking about.



Then you're failing to realize that having a less than playable character is totally an option. Maybe, as you say, it's only a temporary situation, but that's beside the point. Also, we aren't just talking about Player Characters. The rule applies equally to NPCs who are totally down for killing meatbags.

I'm honestly struggling to understand this apparent collective refusal to admit that unoptimized characters exist and are just as valid as optimized ones. We are discussing this rule in a vacuum, and seeing how it impacts unoptimized characters is a completely valid line of discussion that, for some reason, nobody but myself is at all interested in. :smallconfused:

I get that this is, to a certain extent, an optimization-centric forum, but please stop acting like unoptimized play doesn't ever happen. Are you all unwilling to discuss other play styles?
I literally am discussing it with you, I just don't think it's a major concern. All I'm saying is that any character, PC or NPC, has much greater concerns from being turned into an undead against their will, both mechanically and otherwise, than down a couple of rage rounds. Most of those templates come with a charisma bump anyway.

So in the scenario where an NPC is unwillingly turned into an intelligent undead that retains class levels with no charisma bump that started with bad charisma, I guess it's a moldy cherry on top of a garbage pie that is their life up till that point.

[Rhyltran]

No, I never said anyone wasn't roleplaying. My only point is that not all undead Barbarians will have had stats planned out for the purpose of being an undead Barbarian. You can do that if you wish, but realistically it makes sense that some character exist who didn't. Those are the characters I'm thinking about.



Then you're failing to realize that having a less than playable character is totally an option. Maybe, as you say, it's only a temporary situation, but that's beside the point. Also, we aren't just talking about Player Characters. The rule applies equally to NPCs who are totally down for killing meatbags.

I'm honestly struggling to understand this apparent collective refusal to admit that unoptimized characters exist and are just as valid as optimized ones. We are discussing this rule in a vacuum, and seeing how it impacts unoptimized characters is a completely valid line of discussion that, for some reason, nobody but myself is at all interested in. :smallconfused:

I get that this is, to a certain extent, an optimization-centric forum, but please stop acting like unoptimized play doesn't ever happen. Are you all unwilling to discuss other play styles?

To the bolded answers. That's just it though, isn't it? No one is doubting that there are other undead barbarians who don't have optimal stats for an undead barbarian. Likewise, there's probably barbarians who make really crappy barbarians. In the end though the barbarians we play as aren't some normal run of the mill barbarians. They're the player barbarian, champions who will eventually be fighting against Lords of hell, Dragons, and maybe even the avatars of the God's themselves. For those who always want to play optimized characters what they're doing isn't "Unrealistic." there are hundreds of thousands, millions, maybe billions of people depending on the different fantasy worlds. Your character is just one out of that many people who happen to be perfectly designed to do the things that they do.