[3.5] 4-Armed Goliath Barbarian Help [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

ExLibrisMortis

2017-09-04, 08:11 AM

The DMG template is really bad. In fact, all the templates in that section are way, way over-CR'd and LA'd. There is a much better template in Dungeon #136, Obah-Blessed, which grants two or four extra arms. You get, for two and four bonus arms respectively, the following bonuses: +4/+8 on grapple checks, +12/+20 total ability scores (str/dex/con/cha), and Multiweapon Fighting, for +2/+3 LA.

While playing an Obah-Blessed goliath is not super optimal, especially at lower levels, it's not crippling at higher levels.

I'm not sure you can off-hand a greataxe, though. It's still a two-handed weapon for you, which means you incur serious penalties to use it as off-hand. I think you're better off using four or six hands on a special greatsword, adding 2.5 or 3.5 times your strength modifier to damage, or simply making an off-hand attack with each hand individually, using light weapons.

CharonsHelper

2017-09-04, 08:39 AM

I will say - Frenzied Berserker is a pretty terrible PC class unless you feel like risking the death of your party pretty consistently and they're okay with it.

ExLibrisMortis

2017-09-04, 08:58 AM

I will say - Frenzied Berserker is a pretty terrible PC class unless you feel like risking the death of your party pretty consistently and they're okay with it.
Seconded. Only Exalted Frenzied Berserkers are allowed, by use of the Righteous Wrath feat.

Allitra

2017-09-04, 09:06 AM

Exalted Frenzied Berserker? Doesn't that only apply to rages, while frenzied berserkers enter a 'frenzy'?

ExLibrisMortis

2017-09-04, 09:22 AM

Exalted Frenzied Berserker? Doesn't that only apply to rages, while frenzied berserkers enter a 'frenzy'?
Well, technically, perhaps. Still, that only means you should only ever Frenzy while in a Rage, to take advantage of your Righteous Wrath feat :smalltongue:.

Allitra

2017-09-04, 09:38 AM

Fair enough.
So, Exalted Frenzied Berserker, Monkey Grip, and Obah-blessed. Would be the only way to viably play a four armed goliath rager?

Gruftzwerg

2017-09-04, 10:32 AM

Seconded. Only Exalted Frenzied Berserkers are allowed, by use of the Righteous Wrath feat.

Imho not worth it. Better dip into a maneuver class (warblade/crusader) and go for Iron Heart Surge. Solves almost all problems a mundane non-caster can have.

_________

on topic:
Imho LA races are almost never any real good when it comes to optimization. The abilities you could get with classes/prc are most times more worthy.

Allitra

2017-09-04, 10:35 AM

What if I'm not optimizing and just want to play a fun character? I don't want to have LA completely make the character ****, because I'd like to be viable but still enjoy the character concept.

Gruftzwerg

2017-09-04, 11:30 AM

What if I'm not optimizing and just want to play a fun character? I don't want to have LA completely make the character ****, because I'd like to be viable but still enjoy the character concept.

In the end, only the optimization lvl of your group is what matters. Infact, if all other play non optimized builds, you could be even overpowering everybody else.

The problem was just, that you asked if it is "viable". What "viable" means can differ per person to person / table to table. It depends on the optimization lvl as said.

In terms of "worth", only in the early (and maybe to mid) lvls. Later you'll be getting more "worth" of class lvls.

Imho, sure go for it (4 armed goliath) and have fun with him. He should fit your expectation and I guess your group plays on a similar optimization (knowledge) lvl as you. So it should be fine.
I mean, i hope it won't be your sole 3.5 campaign, so you have something for the next time. You don't need to play the max optimized builds as you said. It's just what people in this forum make of words like "viable" and "worth". ;)

ExLibrisMortis

2017-09-04, 01:13 PM

Imho not worth it. Better dip into a maneuver class (warblade/crusader) and go for Iron Heart Surge. Solves almost all problems a mundane non-caster can have.
Even if your DM rules that IHS can end a frenzy (which is not a given, as frenzy requires you to attack your enemies), IHS can only solve problems by giving up a turn and ending your frenzy, which is expensive. Righteous Wrath lets you make use of the entire duration of your frenzy without danger. Obviously that makes the feat cost of using Frenzied Berserker even greater, which is bad, but okay.

In the end, only the optimization lvl of your group is what matters.
+1 to this post.

Gruftzwerg

2017-09-04, 02:05 PM

Even if your DM rules that IHS can end a frenzy (which is not a given, as frenzy requires you to attack your enemies), IHS can only solve problems by giving up a turn and ending your frenzy, which is expensive. Righteous Wrath lets you make use of the entire duration of your frenzy without danger. Obviously that makes the feat cost of using Frenzied Berserker even greater, which is bad, but okay.

DM doesn't need to rule anything to make IHS work:

When you use this maneuver, select one spell, effect, or other condition currently affecting you and with a duration of 1 or more rounds.

Frenzy counts as effect (and maybe even as condition, but "effect" is enough) and thus can be erased by IHS.

Sure it costs a standard action, but when you are going to use it?
When you are out of enemies = end of combat = end of action management (in 99% of the time). So, not a real downside, unless your group is "ninja-looting" with initiative count^^.
And it's a cool RP-gimmick to end fights: > Scream your anger out that you have not been satisfied!

Again, IHS has much more value than Righteous Wrath. And the best part is, if you can't effort the dip, you can get it via magic items for once/encounter use (Iron Heart Vest: novice & solar combined and IHS picked as solar).

And btw, lets not forget that IHS also can get rid of the aftereffects of Frenzy/Rage.

ExLibrisMortis

2017-09-04, 02:23 PM

DM doesn't need to rule anything to make IHS work:
They do. Frenzy doesn't allow you to initiate IHS, because it's not an attack. If you could use it, it'd definitely work, but you can't. Frenzy is not an infamously horrible ability for no reason.

IHS also won't let you deal nonlethal damage (= take prisoners) or ignore enemies (=make tactical decisions) in a rage/frenzy. You can't ready an action or delay, because you "must attack to the best of your ability". You can't retreat if you are at -10 hp, because you must attack (using IHS at this point would kill you, but, eh, that's a niche case).

I'm not saying that IHS isn't better than Righteous Wrath in general, and a warblade dip is pretty much always a good idea, but Righteous Wrath adds something sorely needed to a Frenzied Berserker, even if IHS is houseruled. Basically, frenzy is such a bad ability that you need two feats to make it usable (still, better than a knight's code of honour, which is outright unfixable).

The Viscount

2017-09-04, 04:35 PM

For dealing with Frenzy, if you don't like righteous wrath or being good aligned in general, you can always do the low-tech solution, and just use up all your daily uses of frenzy in the morning before
you do anything. The important features of Supreme Cleave (and more importantly, Supreme Power Attack) function even if you're not Frenzying.

Here's an alternative to using Obah-Blessed or the Aberrant Limbs from DMGII. Two levels of totemist gives you the totem bind, which you can use on the Girallon Arms to gain 2 arms with claws. Now technically it doesn't discuss their use as arms, so you might have to ask your DM, but if they're solid enough to fight, climb, and grapple, they should be solid enough to wield a weapon.

Is the Goliath an important part of your build? If not, you might think about a Diopsid with the Strongarm Bracers. It doesn't have ability modifiers that are quite so attractive, but it would get you dual wielding Large 2-handed weapons at only 1 LA instead of the 3 LA or 1 LA and 2 levels we're discussing. It also makes taking the Two Weapon Fighting chain easier.

Might I ask you are using the Fighter levels for in this build? Are you going Dungeoncrasher Fighter?

Gruftzwerg

2017-09-04, 10:58 PM

They do. Frenzy doesn't allow you to initiate IHS, because it's not an attack. If you could use it, it'd definitely work, but you can't. Frenzy is not an infamously horrible ability for no reason.

IHS also won't let you deal nonlethal damage (= take prisoners) or ignore enemies (=make tactical decisions) in a rage/frenzy. You can't ready an action or delay, because you "must attack to the best of your ability". You can't retreat if you are at -10 hp, because you must attack (using IHS at this point would kill you, but, eh, that's a niche case).

I'm not saying that IHS isn't better than Righteous Wrath in general, and a warblade dip is pretty much always a good idea, but Righteous Wrath adds something sorely needed to a Frenzied Berserker, even if IHS is houseruled. Basically, frenzy is such a bad ability that you need two feats to make it usable (still, better than a knight's code of honour, which is outright unfixable).

Rage/Frenzy ain't limiting you to attacks sole. You can still use most feats (including Martial Stance & Study..) and thus the use of any maneuvers unless they rely on a skill (e.g. concentration) that can't be used in a rage/frenzy.
So I ask you, why shouldn't you be able to use IHS? There is no rules that prevents this. Reread the abilities pls. And ToB p39 says, that maneuvers normally don't involve concentration unless noted otherwise.

Further Rage/Frenzy don't let you become Leroy Jenkins either. You don't become mindless (as we all like to roleplay Rage/Frenzy, I know^^) and have to attack the first foe on sight. You may still make tactical decisions and pick your enemies for your round. You maybe are not allowed to come up with a great masterplan while in battle, but tactical decisions for your combat actions in the round is totally within the limits of Rage/Frenzy.

Unless you are playing in a "capturing enemies alive / we have this VoP guy with us" campaign, I don't see any value for Righteous Wrath other than a small niche.

CharonsHelper

2017-09-05, 09:10 AM

Further Rage/Frenzy don't let you become Leroy Jenkins either. You don't become mindless (as we all like to roleplay Rage/Frenzy, I know^^) and have to attack the first foe on sight. You may still make tactical decisions and pick your enemies for your round. You maybe are not allowed to come up with a great masterplan while in battle, but tactical decisions for your combat actions in the round is totally within the limits of Rage/Frenzy.

Rage doesn't.

Frenzy kinda does - only in many ways worse than Leroy.

In addition, if she takes damage from an attack, spell, trap, or any other source, she automatically enters a frenzy at the start of her next action, as long as she still has at least one daily usage of the ability left. To avoid entering a frenzy in response to a provoking effect, the character must make a successful Will save (DC 10 + points of damage taken since her last action) at the start of her next turn.
While frenzied, the character cannot use any Charisma-, Dexterity-, or Intelligence-based skills (except for Intimidate),
the Concentration skill, or any abilities that require patience or concentration, nor can she cast spells, drink potions, activate magic items, or read scrolls. She can use any feat she has except Combat Expertise, item creation feats, or metamagic feats.
She can use her special ability to inspire frenzy (see
below) normally. During a frenzy, the frenzied
berserker must attack those she perceives as foes to the best of her ability. Should she run out of
enemies before her frenzy expires, her rampage continues. She must then attack the nearest creature (determine randomly if several potential foes are equidistant) and fight that opponent
without regard to friendship, innocence, or health (the target’s or her own).

Do you realize how easy it is for some basic illusions to trick the Frenzied Berserker into absolutely shredding their wizard buddy? It's freakin' easy. Just use a basic illusion (Silent Image works) on the wizard to make them look like a mindflayer or some other monster, and then hit him with decent damage from stealth (Fireball works - good luck passing that DC 30+ Will Save to avoid Frenzy). Next turn the Frenzied Berserker goes crazy and shreds the wizard next to them with a full frenzied attack because she "perceives" them as a foe and doesn't "perceive" any other enemies.

Or any time a random trap hits the Frenzied Berserker for a few points of damage they need a Will Save to avoid going crazy and shredding their buddies without even thinking that they're foes.

In my mind that's much worse than Leroy.

As said above - I suppose that you could just intentionally burn all of your frenzies when you first wake up every day - but otherwise it is NOT a good PC class.

ExLibrisMortis

2017-09-05, 10:23 AM

Rage/Frenzy ain't limiting you to attacks sole. You can still use most feats (including Martial Stance & Study..) and thus the use of any maneuvers unless they rely on a skill (e.g. concentration) that can't be used in a rage/frenzy.
So I ask you, why shouldn't you be able to use IHS? There is no rules that prevents this. Reread the abilities pls. And ToB p39 says, that maneuvers normally don't involve concentration unless noted otherwise.

Further Rage/Frenzy don't let you become Leroy Jenkins either. You don't become mindless (as we all like to roleplay Rage/Frenzy, I know^^) and have to attack the first foe on sight. You may still make tactical decisions and pick your enemies for your round. You maybe are not allowed to come up with a great masterplan while in battle, but tactical decisions for your combat actions in the round is totally within the limits of Rage/Frenzy.

Unless you are playing in a "capturing enemies alive / we have this VoP guy with us" campaign, I don't see any value for Righteous Wrath other than a small niche.
Dude, you're asking me to read the abilities, when you can't even get my point right? You don't even realize that Frenzy imposes different behaviour restrictions than Rage?

Very simple:
1) Iron Heart Surge takes a standard action.
2) Iron Heart Surge does not hurt enemies.
3) A standard action could be used to hurt enemies.
4) In a Frenzy, you must attack to the best of your ability.
5) An attack must be something that hurts enemies.
6) Ergo, while in a Frenzy, you must choose to attack over initiating Iron Heart Surge.

You definitely become Leroy Jenkins in a Frenzy. You can-- no, you must find the best way to attack enemies, you must attack in that way, and you can't deal nonlethal damage, show mercy, or use IHS. Arguably, if you are a Frenzied Berserker with Pounce and Shock Trooper, you are required-- the DM can force you to full-PA übercharge every turn, because anything else is simply not "attacking to the best of your ability". And that's not even a stretch of the rules--"to the best of your ability" is really bloody obvious when it comes to überchargers.

So yeah, it's pretty clear that Righteous Wrath has a use. It's a small niche, but that's because Frenzy sucks so bad, not because Righteous Wrath doesn't fix it well.

Grod_The_Giant

2017-09-05, 10:35 AM

I would really like to play this four-armed barbarian. It's a really neat concept I like. If I were to go with Monkey Grip and wield 4 huge battleaxes. Would it still be a manageable/useful character to play?
I can't find my build, but it was something like Barbarian 2/Fighter 8/Frenzied Berserker 10.
It... quite possibly would not. Level adjustment is bad. Really bad. You lose to-hit, you lose iterative attacks, you lose class features... and, most dangerously, you lose hit dice. If you're a LA+3 four-armed goliath barbarian 2 with 18 Con, say, you'd have 25 hit points. Meanwhile, the LA+0 human barbarian 5 with 16 Con would have 51. Even if the benefits you get (extra arms!) make up for the lost BAB and class features, you're usually left as a dangerously squishy glass cannon.

Looking at less dangerous options... hmm.

Diopsids are a race in Dragon Compendium; they have an extra pair of "secondary arms" that are primarily (and explicitly!) used for exactly the thing you're looking at-- dual wielding two handed weapons. They also can ignore the Dex prereqs on two-weapon fighting feats, and get a hefty NA bonus. Overall, exactly what you're looking for, and all for the low, low price of LA+1.
The Girallon Arms soulmeld is available as soon as Totemist 2, and gives you four claw attacks. Totemist goes really well with Barbarian (there's even a PrC for it), but I don't think it can do weapons by RAW.
Girallon's Blessing is a 3rd level spell that gives you an extra sets of limbs for 10 min/level. You can potential get a Permanency'd version, or a continuous item.
A Phylactery of Change is a ~11,000 gold magic item from the Arms and Equipment guide that'll let you polymorph with indefinite duration, 1/day. Turn into something with a bunch of arms and rock out.
There are probably some grafts available that don't explicitly say they replace your existing limbs... they tend to be pretty pricy, though.

Fouredged Sword

2017-09-05, 10:45 AM

This could be worth it... at level 18 after LA buy off. It isn't OPTIMAL, but it would be better than a human barbarian at the same level.

Gruftzwerg

2017-09-05, 11:38 AM

Do you realize how easy it is for some basic illusions to trick the Frenzied Berserker into absolutely shredding their wizard buddy? It's freakin' easy. Just use a basic illusion (Silent Image works) on the wizard to make them look like a mindflayer or some other monster, and then hit him with decent damage from stealth (Fireball works - good luck passing that DC 30+ Will Save to avoid Frenzy).

First, Silent Image (Figment) isn't able to produce the effect you described. To change the appearance of a creature, you would need to use Disguise Self (Glamer) which is "personal" only. Doesn't work so easy as you try to describe it. No. Reread the difference between Figment and Glamer Illusions and what each one can and can not do.

She can use any feat she has except Combat Expertise, item creation feats, or metamagic feats.

Since Iron Heart Surge can be obtained via feats (Martial Study) and it's not Combat Expertise nor a item creation feats nor a metamagic feat, it's usable while in a Frenzy.

Further, if we take the unoffical offical ToB errata (http://drammelsnotes.wikidot.com/the-unofficial-official-errata):

Q: Can a barbarian use maneuvers (from Tome of Battle) while raging? What about Diamond Mind maneuvers that require a Concentration check to use? What about to recover maneuvers in the middle of combat?
A: According to the text under the Concentration heading on page 39 of Tome of Battle, the text states “unlike with spells or psionic powers, you need not concentrate to initiate a maneuver or stance.” Because initiating a maneuver does not require concentration, you would be able to perform most maneuvers while in a barbarian’s Rage, or in any other condition which mimics the restrictions or raging. While raging, a character would not be able to use any Diamond Mind maneuver that requires a concentration check. Using a special action to recover an expended maneuver would fall into the category of “any abilities that require patience or concentration,” so a character would not be able to recover maneuvers in this way while raging.

I guess Frenzy is a rage mimicking condition and thus also allows maneuvers, unless they explicitly mention the need of (a) concentration (check).

I know you want to point me to the "needs to attack his foes" part, but that part doesn't limit the "may use feats with these exceptions" part. You don't have the restrictions to use your feats only to attack your enemies. This is only your RAI and not what RAW would dictate.

CharonsHelper

2017-09-05, 11:53 AM

First, Silent Image (Figment) isn't able to produce the effect you described. To change the appearance of a creature, you would need to use Disguise Self (Glamer) which is "personal" only. Doesn't work so easy as you try to describe it. No. Reread the difference between Figment and Glamer Illusions and what each one can and can not do.

I'm not going to do the Illusion arguments here. But whatever. You don't actually NEED to make his buddy look like an enemy - you just need to do damage to the Frenzied Berserker with a Silent Spell while staying invisible.

She can't actually go look for you like a rational person if they go into Frenzy. If they don't "perceive" any foes they just start beating on their closest friend - albeit not necessarily the wizard in particular.

Since Iron Heart Surge can be obtained via feats (Martial Study) and it's not Combat Expertise nor a item creation feats nor a metamagic feat, it's usable while in a Frenzy.

You're taking that out of context. They can use feats (other than the listed ones) AND "the frenzied berserker must attack those she perceives as foes to the best of her ability". It's not one or the other. It's both.

If using a feat isn't attacking to the best of their ability then they inherently can't do it. Iron Heart Surge didn't even exist when Frenzied Berserker was written - you can hardly expect it to be included anyway. (not that its lack would prove anything anyway)

Gruftzwerg

2017-09-05, 01:02 PM

I'm not going to do the Illusion arguments here. But whatever. You don't actually NEED to make his buddy look like an enemy - you just need to do damage to the Frenzied Berserker with a Silent Spell while staying invisible.

She can't actually go look for you like a rational person if they go into Frenzy. If they don't "perceive" any foes they just start beating on their closest friend - albeit not necessarily the wizard in particular.

1. Maybe you forget the Frenzy itself already has an in-build mechanism to end it. So, it's not like he has to be deadly willed to use every remaining round of his Frenzy and may try to end it within the rules.
2. When would you think would this in-build option to end it be used by a Frenzied Berserker? I guess at the moment "when he realizes that his enemies died, but not his bloodlust" (aka remaining Frenzy duration). I mean, why would he be able to end it earlier if he couldn't decide/think when the right moment is? So he is not "that mindless".

You're taking that out of context. They can use feats (other than the listed ones) AND "the frenzied berserker must attack those she perceives as foes to the best of her ability". It's not one or the other. It's both.

If using a feat isn't attacking to the best of their ability then they inherently can't do it. Iron Heart Surge didn't even exist when Frenzied Berserker was written - you can hardly expect it to be included anyway. (not that its lack would prove anything anyway)

Who is taking it out of context? It's you who is "combining 2 separate sentences with the word "AND" and taking it out of context. One allows for feat use (with exceptions), the other allows to attack only. It doesn't say "you may only use feats to attack your enemies except ...", it says "you may use feats except..".

Further the unoffical offical errata also allows to use maneuvers (unless with concentration) in rage like abilities. Cause, otherwise it would be odd to deny maneuvers gained from class while allowing maneuvers gained from feats.

ExLibrisMortis

2017-09-05, 01:18 PM

Who is taking it out of context?
You are.

It's you who is "combining 2 separate sentences with the word "AND" and taking it out of context. One allows for feat use (with exceptions), the other allows to attack only. It doesn't say "you may only use feats to attack your enemies except ...", it says "you may use feats except..".
If an ability's rules text contains multiple clauses within itself, all clauses apply simultaneously. The AND is implicit, and conclusions follow logically. That's how language works. If you're not ready to admit that, good luck reading any text of more than two paragraphs.

CharonsHelper

2017-09-05, 01:54 PM

Gruftzwerg

2017-09-05, 02:02 PM

You are.

If an ability's rules text contains multiple clauses within itself, all clauses apply simultaneously. The AND is implicit, and conclusions follow logically. That's how language works. If you're not ready to admit that, good luck reading any text of more than two paragraphs.

RAI, maybe. But that's not how RAW works. Sry.
The ability itself already has a mechanism to cancel it earlier, which means your character may have the desire to end it earlier (even if he fails at that).
Further, if it was the intention that the feat part would extend the attack part (your logic), how comes that the the feat stuff is mentioned first? If that would have been the intention as you said, it would be first "that you need to attack every turn" and than "that you may use these feats while doing so". But that is not the chase.
You are reading more into it than the plain text provides (by changing order and implementing words that aren't there) and that is called RAI and not RAW.

edit: further still no argument about the unofficial offical errata stuff that also comes to the same conclusion (for Rage like effects, which Frenzy is).

CharonsHelper

2017-09-05, 02:11 PM

RAI, maybe. But that's not how RAW works. Sry.

As the rules are written in English. Yes. Yes it is.

In any sort of legalese document - that's exactly how it works. (a decent chunk of my job is figuring that crap out where the implied "and" and/or "or" are awkwardly written)

further still no argument about the unofficial offical errata stuff that also comes to the same conclusion (for Rage like effects, which Frenzy is).

Frenzy & Rage are very different things which happen to work similarly. Rage never requires you to attack as much as you can or ever attack your buddies.

torrasque666

2017-09-05, 09:59 PM

The ability itself already has a mechanism to cancel it earlier, which means your character may have the desire to end it earlier (even if he fails at that). The mechanism to end it does not fall under the same circumstances as IHS, as IHS prevents you from attacking by eating your standard, while the save is a free action. Thus, you can attempt to end it without breaking the "attack to the best of your ability" clause.

Gruftzwerg

2017-09-05, 10:02 PM

As the rules are written in English. Yes. Yes it is.

In any sort of legalese document - that's exactly how it works. (a decent chunk of my job is figuring that crap out where the implied "and" and/or "or" are awkwardly written)

Frenzy & Rage are very different things which happen to work similarly. Rage never requires you to attack as much as you can or ever attack your buddies.

Sry, but the text lacks any evidence that you need to combine all conditions, which leads to the conclusion to treat them as "inclusive or" and not to combine em with an "and". And as said, if the feat part would be an addition, further explaining what you may do "while attacking", the "you have to attack each part" would stand first from a logical point of view and not last.
With the lack of any combining word and logical structuring, you are combining two things that aren't meant to be treated together.
For me it's obvious that these 2 conditions has to be treated separately from each other, cause otherwise there is also a 3rd condition that you forget to combine with the other. "To end the Frenzy with a free Will roll". Would it make sense to combine that with the other to conditions with an "and"? No, but a "inclusive or" would fit.
Sry, but imho it's obvious how you need to treat em by RAW. I don't need to imply words into the text. The text as it stays provides enough rules.
While I can see, that the intention (RAI) of the designers could have been something else, that is not what the text (RAW) provides. The text says:

- you can make a free will check every turn to try to end it earlier if you want.

- you can use feats (with the mentioned exceptions)

- you have to attack every turn. if no enemies are left, you attack your nearest friend/ally.

The feat part lacks any evidence that it is only related to the "has to attack every turn". Why shouldn't I be able to magically combine the feats part with the "you may try to end it earlier" part, like you did with feats and "has to attack every turn"?

I hope you can see now that the text is meant to be read as "inclusive or" and not with "and" logic.

Frenzy itself allows for maneuvers & feats that fall under its restrictions. Even if you say has to attack every turn, the use of feats is allowed and IHS immediately turns that condition off. You use feats before the actual attack resolves. So everything is fine.

Rage & Frenzy:
If Rage and Frenzy are not similar, than tell me what are:

while in a barbarian’s Rage, or in any other condition which mimics the restrictions or raging.?
Is there anything else besides from Frenzy itself that would fit that? What else mimics raging? Note that that the answer is referring to "raging", a undefined word in 3.5 (and thus default English applies here) and not sole the barb class feature. And imho "Frenzy" has enough "raging" in it to qualify here.

ExLibrisMortis

2017-09-06, 09:43 AM

For me it's obvious that these 2 conditions has to be treated separately from each other, cause otherwise there is also a 3rd condition that you forget to combine with the other. "To end the Frenzy with a free Will roll". Would it make sense to combine that with the other to conditions with an "and"?
Yes, obviously it's an "and", otherwise the entire rule system doesn't work. Technically it's not a logical AND, it's a pragmatic conjunction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjunction_(grammar)) "and". You don't get to choose a subset of active rules. All rules apply simultaneously with the widest possible scope. As such, the following rules apply at all times while in a frenzy:
0) You have activated your frenzy and it is ongoing, you have consumed a frenzy use/have X uses remaining, etcetera. (this is just the basic assumption of the situation)
1) You gain certain benefits (strength, extra attack) and penalties (nonlethal damage, AC penalty).
2) You may end the frenzy with a will save.
3) You can't use certain skills and feats.
4) You can use any feats not specified to be forbidden. (this is just a reiteration of the general rule.)
5) You must attack "to the best of your ability".
6) If there are no enemies to attack, you must attack the nearest creature.
7) When you end your frenzy, you are fatigued until the end of the encounter, unless you are in another rage ability at the time, in which case the fatigue applies at the end of that.

Each of these rules is separately active with the widest possible scope, meaning everything written in the ability applies, unless subsequently modified by another rule. For example, Righteous Wrath would override (5) and (6), in that you may explicitly show mercy and tell friend from foe.

In fact, all these rules still apply if you aren't in a frenzy. They apply even if you're not a frenzied berserker. Of course, they are totally irrelevant if you aren't a frenzied berserker, because these rules have no scope outside a frenzy, and thus you are not affected by them. But technically, all rules apply all the time, with the widest possible scope.

Let me put this in another way. If you say: "The dog barks. The cat meows.", does that mean I, as listener, get to pick either "The dog barks" or "The cat meows" as your message? No, of course not. Your message is both statements, conjoined. You are describing a situation in which dogs bark and cats meow (or the general property of dogs and cats to respectively bark and meow, which can be the same in English).

Grod_The_Giant

2017-09-06, 09:51 AM

Meanwhile, the OP has given up completely...

Bakkan

2017-09-06, 09:54 AM

Suppose the employee handbook says "You must arrive on time for each of your shifts. While working, you must wear your uniform." This cannot possibly mean that as long as I wear my uniform I can show up late. I am required to follow every one of the restrictions in the list. This is how compound restrictions or requirements work, and making it an "or" situation would require explicit language to hat effect.

Gruftzwerg

2017-09-06, 11:30 AM

Let me put this in another way. If you say: "The dog barks. The cat meows.", does that mean I, as listener, get to pick either "The dog barks" or "The cat meows" as your message? No, of course not.

and Frenzied Berserker berserk lol.. ;)
Sorry but you missed the point somehow. Frenzy say that your actions are limited and gives you options you may do. While your example doesn't allow me to anything and ain't comparable thus.
"You can hear "dogs barks" and "cat meows" as ability would be better (even if it sounds stupid) example. And yes, you can hear either when a dog barks or a cat meows and you can hear both of em together.

Coming back to our example: You can make a Will save, use a feat and/or attack. Cause everything is mentioned separately and not together.
____

Inspire Frenzy (SU): is usable while in Frenzy. Since the ability doesn't mention a special action type, the default action would be a standard action. Not tell me how that is working with your way of ruling? How is the Frenzied Berserker gonna use it while in Frenzy and than later attack that round? Doesn't work. So I guess it's ok to use feats that consume your actions to attack while in Frenzy.

I hope that could clear the situation up now. :smallbiggrin:

ExLibrisMortis

2017-09-06, 01:50 PM

Gruftzwerg

2017-09-06, 03:00 PM

You still don't understand what a conjunction is. The following are simultaneously true:
1) You can make a Will save OR you can not make a Will save.
2) You can use a feat OR you can not use a feat.
3) You can attack.

The choice you make must be in the intersection of these three things.

(1) allows every choice. You're always either making a Will save, or not.
(2) is the same. You're always either using some feat, or not.
(3) is different. It forces you to do something.

Couple of options:
1) Dysfunction, Inspire Frenzy can never be used.
2) Exception, Inspire Frenzy can be used at any time.
3) Inspire Frenzy can be used only when you can't directly hurt an enemy.
4) Inspire Frenzy counts as "attacking to the best of your ability", because it increases expected damage over time. Would also allow Dragonfire Inspiration and similar buff abilities. Far too complicated to use.
5) Houserule, Inspire Frenzy now takes a swift action. (not a real solution)

RAW is 3. I think RAI is 2. None of those allow you to use Iron Heart Surge. You can't go from one exception to the general case.

eh what? Cause I am in good mode and it did gave me a good laugh, I'll answer point by point.
1. So now it is a Dysfuntion? Because what? Because it doesn't fit your theory?
2. Or wait, it is an exception and somehow that exception only magically applies to Inspire Frenzy and ignores the feat-part!?
3. Where are you reading that in the rules? And wait, now the FB "has to use Inspire Frenzy" when he can't attack the enemy? Your teammates will thank you for changing the plot into "Highlander - There can be only one". Cause your teammates won't have enemies to attack too and guess what will happen than.. This is getting really funny *sigh*
4. oh yeah, I like that one. What else are you reading what is not in the text to explain your version of Frenzy?
5. If you would stop houseruling Frenzy into an odd dysfunctional state, you wouldn't need to houserules it again to make it work with Inspire Frenzy.

You know what? The theory with the least assumptions is probably the right one. And you sir, have started to make a lot of em in your last post. Think about it.

ExLibrisMortis

2017-09-06, 04:39 PM

eh what? Cause I am in good mode and it did gave me a good laugh, I'll answer point by point.
1. So now it is a Dysfuntion? Because what? Because it doesn't fit your theory?
2. Or wait, it is an exception and somehow that exception only magically applies to Inspire Frenzy and ignores the feat-part!?
3. Where are you reading that in the rules? And wait, now the FB "has to use Inspire Frenzy" when he can't attack the enemy? Your teammates will thank you for changing the plot into "Highlander - There can be only one". Cause your teammates won't have enemies to attack too and guess what will happen than.. This is getting really funny *sigh*
4. oh yeah, I like that one. What else are you reading what is not in the text to explain your version of Frenzy?
5. If you would stop houseruling Frenzy into an odd dysfunctional state, you wouldn't need to houserules it again to make it work with Inspire Frenzy.

You know what? The theory with the least assumptions is probably the right one. And you sir, have started to make a lot of em in your last post. Think about it.
You did read the part where I said (1), (4), and (5) weren't my choice, right? Go back, read my post again. I listed them for completeness, not because I agreed with them. I'm glad you don't agree with them either. Case closed.

(2) Yes, it must be an exception, because it is a specific rule that contradicts a general rule. The ability to use feats and abilities--which is the general rule, also for rage, don't forget--is overriden by the more specific requirement to attack. The ability to use Inspire Frenzy is even more specific, overriding the requirement to attack. Standard exception-based rule system: all rules apply, but the more specific rule in a given situation 'wins'.
(3) The phrase "can be used only when" does not mean "has to be used when". That would require "only ... can be used when", different word order.

Gruftzwerg

2017-09-07, 01:14 AM

You did read the part where I said (1), (4), and (5) weren't my choice, right? Go back, read my post again. I listed them for completeness, not because I agreed with them. I'm glad you don't agree with them either. Case closed.

(2) Yes, it must be an exception, because it is a specific rule that contradicts a general rule. The ability to use feats and abilities--which is the general rule, also for rage, don't forget--is overriden by the more specific requirement to attack. The ability to use Inspire Frenzy is even more specific, overriding the requirement to attack. Standard exception-based rule system: all rules apply, but the more specific rule in a given situation 'wins'.
(3) The phrase "can be used only when" does not mean "has to be used when". That would require "only ... can be used when", different word order.

Don't worry, I read every letter of the post. It doesn't change that you lost ground based on arguments and start to make several assumptions to claim that only your theory is right. Instead, the way how I interpret the rules don't need such assumptions. I just work with the text given.

to (2): Just that there is no general when the specific is mentioned (an no indication that is comes later). And even if it would work like you say. Why doesn't it work for feats too? Why only Inspire Frenzy gets the extra cake? Makes no sense that way, sry.

to (3): I just wanted to make a lil joke and point out that the sole scenario where under your special Frenzy ruling, when Inspire Frenzy is finally usable, what it would produce for results. See that this kind of interpretation just causes more odd problems and thus seems to be wrong.
____
compare to what the rules clearly allows and try to follow my interpratation and we will have 0 odd scenarios or rule dysfunctions left:

1. You may Inspire Frenzy even if it denies you to attack your enemies this turn.
2. You may use feats (with the mentioned restrictions, no crafting, meta..), even if it denies you to attack your enemies this turn.

Both, Inspire Frenzy and the feat usage are mentioned before the attack requirement. So you can't say that they are specific to it. To be general, something has to be mentioned first. You can't work with specific information without the general info. That doesn't work out.

Rules and Laws need structure for better reading. If you wouldn't have that, you would ALWAYS need to read the ENTIRE rules every time to make sure that you haven't forgotten anything that might apply to the situation. Since that would take forever, you structure the text for better usage/readability.

If "attacking each turn" would have any kind of priority compared to the other options a FB has, it would be mentioned first or at least mention its "priority" clearly. But that is not the chase. You just picked your favorite option and did give it top priority without any indications that the rules demand this.

If your interpretation would be right, a frenzied FB would still need to attack after successfully making his Will-save, which ain't right. The non-attack options Frenzy gives, can deny your option to attack, due to lack of Frenzy (successful will save) or actions (Inspire Frenzy and some feats like IHS).

You try to make it sound like that you have to invest your actions into attacks, but that is not what the rules tell us.
I can read the rules without any of em becoming dysfunctional. Unless you can come up with a theory/interpretation that works/fits as good, I guess my arguments will win.

And no: the "3.5 is full of bugs/dysfunctional rules"-joker won't work here. Since we have a interpretation version that clearly works fine with the rules.

ExLibrisMortis

2017-09-07, 09:19 AM

Instead, the way how I interpret the rules don't need such assumptions.
You're assuming that the first line of an ability takes precedence over the second line. That's ridiculous, and you just made that up. I'm done explaining. I've been patient enough, and you're not understanding even basic rules.

Gruftzwerg

2017-09-07, 01:19 PM

You're assuming that the first line of an ability takes precedence over the second line. That's ridiculous, and you just made that up. I'm done explaining. I've been patient enough, and you're not understanding even basic rules.

No I don't assume that it takes precedence. You are assuming that "has to attack every turn" condition takes precedence without any evidence in the ruletext to prove that.

While "Inspire Frenzy" is also (like some feats) allowed to consume your standard action and deny your attacks for this turn, you assume that the "has to attack" has priority over everything else, what would make the ability dysfunctional.

Have you any rules to prove your dysfunction causing point? That the "hast to attack" part has priority/precedence over the things mention EARLIER in the text?

Btw, it doesn't say: "You have to attack every turn. You may use feats while doing so", it says "the frenzied berserker must attack those she perceives as foes to the best of her ability. ".
It doesn't even mention to attack every turn. Just that if you have actions left after possible "Inspire Frenzy/Feat" usage, you have to attack.

AnimeTheCat

2017-09-07, 02:25 PM

Well, @Gruftzwerg, you're right. Nothing is stopping you from using the feat "Martial Study" while in a frenzy. Using "Martial Study" however carries the use cost of the maneuver you're using, which is a standard action. As a standard action, you're not really attacking your enemies to the best of your ability if you use IHS on yourself to end the thing that's granting you a tremendous bonus to your strength score. That seems like it's taking away from your "best ability" do attack your foes.

Attack (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#standardActions) is a standard action. Full Attack (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#fullAttack) is a full round action. Anything that prevents you from doing one of these two is innately inhibiting you from attacking those you perceives as foes to the best of your ability.

Taking a standard action to activate IHS inhibits your ability to Attack and Full Attack. I don't think you can use IHS on that premise, regardless of whether it requires concentration or not.

To the OP:
I think that if you want to play something with 4 arms, being a Goliath totemist 2/barbarian X would get you the extra arms (Girallon Arms Totem Bind) without a +2 LA, reducing your need for LA buyoff and reducing you to only +1. It also gives you 4 natural attacks that you can improve with essentia (if you continue down the totemist route) and take feats for. There are also other soulmelds that are really quite interesting that would likely be fun for your character too giving you breath attacks, ranged options, etc that would likely be really fun. You should be able to go Barbarian 1/Totemist 9/Frenzied Berserker 10 and have a fun game. Barbarian 1 should use the Spirit Lion Totem ACF to get pounce (for when you get your 4 claws).

EDIT:
Inspire Frenzy is called out as being able to use as normal in the frenzy text... That leads me to believe that it's not a dysfunction but an exception to the frenzy rules.

CharonsHelper

2017-09-07, 06:49 PM

No I don't assume that it takes precedence. You are assuming that "has to attack every turn" condition takes precedence without any evidence in the ruletext to prove that.

Nope. He's using logic to show that BOTH have equal precedence as 100% requirements.

Gruftzwerg

2017-09-07, 10:05 PM

Well, @Gruftzwerg, you're right. Nothing is stopping you from using the feat "Martial Study" while in a frenzy. Using "Martial Study" however carries the use cost of the maneuver you're using, which is a standard action. As a standard action, you're not really attacking your enemies to the best of your ability if you use IHS on yourself to end the thing that's granting you a tremendous bonus to your strength score. That seems like it's taking away from your "best ability" do attack your foes.

Attack (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#standardActions) is a standard action. Full Attack (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#fullAttack) is a full round action. Anything that prevents you from doing one of these two is innately inhibiting you from attacking those you perceives as foes to the best of your ability.

Taking a standard action to activate IHS inhibits your ability to Attack and Full Attack. I don't think you can use IHS on that premise, regardless of whether it requires concentration or not.

*snip*

EDIT:
Inspire Frenzy is called out as being able to use as normal in the frenzy text... That leads me to believe that it's not a dysfunction but an exception to the frenzy rules.

So, Inspire Frenzy is an exception to the (other) Frenzy rules. Now explain me pls, why this shouldn't be the chase for the feats-part too? What does the "Inspire Frenzy"-part of the Frenzy ability text has, what the feat part does not? Where do you see the difference, that would handicap feat usage more than the Inspire Frenzy part?
There is none. Which leads to the conclusion that the "has to attack his enemies at his/her best" is the weakest condition of all of em.
Inspire Frenzy can deny you "to attack to your best" in that "single round". Note that Frenzy doesn't strictly demand "to attack every turn".
When you take this as indicator that the attack condition is the weakest of all conditions (not equal to the others and may be suppressed by the other options.), the rules work fine without any dysfunction at all.

The problem only occurs if
"the frenzied berserker must attack those she perceives as foes to the best of her ability." is interpreted as: "has to attack no matter what other (Frenzy) options you took so far in that round."
And that would make the attack condition taking priority before the others, making em not equal at all !!
But there are no indicators would that show that the attack condition has any kind of priority. It is mentioned last. Would you put the most important condition at the end without any special indicator for it's priority? I guess not.

I hope I could clear the confusion up a lil bit.. ;)

edit: typos..^^

Vizzerdrix

2017-09-07, 10:11 PM

At this point the topic is so far off track that not even a gps could save it.

Gruftzwerg

2017-09-07, 10:32 PM

At this point the topic is so far off track that not even a gps could save it.

Well has to happen from time to time in a forum. =)
We discuss stuff to make sure that we got it right. I mean, isn't that the purpose of a forum?

Sure we got off topic due to that. But imho that's the way it has to be. Or would you prefer it that every time when in a thread 2 different opinions occur to pause there, make a separate thread each time to discuss it there, and than returning back to the previous thread to discuss further on? Sometimes after several days has passed on that side quest?
It would be to complicated to make separates thread in such situations, so we have to bear it as it comes I guess.

Sure sometimes you know what is coming. e.g. a thread where the "are DWK true dragons" situation occurs. Everybody knows how this will escalate if the right people clash together^^. In such situations everybody should be willing to make a separate thread for it.

But in our actual chase I don't think it will escalate that badly. We are still at page 2, so no big deal so far.
And the thread gets free bumbs and still some related post from time to time. So, the thread author should be happy somehow. ;)