paizo.com Recent Posts in So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?paizo.com Recent Posts in So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?2012-04-06T02:54:07Z2012-04-06T02:54:07ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Staffan Johanssonhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#782012-04-05T20:43:32Z2012-04-05T20:43:32Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Digitalelf wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Deadmanwalking wrote:</div><blockquote>You could play a Barbarian in 2nd Ed. as a berserker (there was a character kit and everything)...but it certainly wasn't a base part of the class. </blockquote><p>The Barbarian as a class wasn't even a part of 2nd edition...
<p>TSR's reasoning was that to be a barbarian was a philosophy, not a choice of career or profession (which is what classes were in 1st/2nd edition)</p>
<p>The "Complete Barbarian's Handbook" (the 14th book in the series) didn't even come out until 1995 (and 2nd edition came out in 1989)...</blockquote><p>You also had Barbarian as a kit in the Complete Fighter's Handbook. The only mechanical abilities they had was that they got Endurance as a free NWP, and that they got more extreme results on reaction rolls on account of being "impressive".
<p>There was also a Berserker kit, but it kind of sucked. The Berserk ability took a full turn (10 minutes/rounds) to activate, and had some pretty serious drawbacks as well.</p>Digitalelf wrote:Deadmanwalking wrote:You could play a Barbarian in 2nd Ed. as a berserker (there was a character kit and everything)...but it certainly wasn't a base part of the class.
The Barbarian as a class wasn't even a part of 2nd edition... TSR's reasoning was that to be a barbarian was a philosophy, not a choice of career or profession (which is what classes were in 1st/2nd edition)
The "Complete Barbarian's Handbook" (the 14th book in the series) didn't even come out until 1995...Staffan Johansson2012-04-05T20:43:32ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Digitalelfhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#772012-04-05T16:12:19Z2012-04-05T16:12:19Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deadmanwalking wrote:</div><blockquote>You could play a Barbarian in 2nd Ed. as a berserker (there was a character kit and everything)...but it certainly wasn't a base part of the class. </blockquote><p>The Barbarian as a class wasn't even a part of 2nd edition...
<p>TSR's reasoning was that to be a barbarian was a philosophy, not a choice of career or profession (which is what classes were in 1st/2nd edition)</p>
<p>The "Complete Barbarian's Handbook" (the 14th book in the series) didn't even come out until 1995 (and 2nd edition came out in 1989)...</p>
<p>And even then, it was the "Fighter Barbarian" or "Shaman" and not a "true" class unto itself...</p>Deadmanwalking wrote:You could play a Barbarian in 2nd Ed. as a berserker (there was a character kit and everything)...but it certainly wasn't a base part of the class.
The Barbarian as a class wasn't even a part of 2nd edition... TSR's reasoning was that to be a barbarian was a philosophy, not a choice of career or profession (which is what classes were in 1st/2nd edition)
The "Complete Barbarian's Handbook" (the 14th book in the series) didn't even come out until 1995 (and 2nd edition...Digitalelf2012-04-05T16:12:19ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Loboluskhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#762012-04-05T15:46:03Z2012-04-05T15:46:03Z<p>Guess what it boils down for to me is, I am okay with the barbarian being non lawful I am not okay with them not being able to rage, once they are lawful that to me is the part that makes no sense. feel free to say they cant go barb again till they go back to non lawful like the monk.</p>Guess what it boils down for to me is, I am okay with the barbarian being non lawful I am not okay with them not being able to rage, once they are lawful that to me is the part that makes no sense. feel free to say they cant go barb again till they go back to non lawful like the monk.Lobolusk2012-04-05T15:46:03ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?the majestic moosehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#752012-04-05T07:24:14Z2012-04-05T07:24:14Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Helaman wrote:</div><blockquote>Heck, why can't I have a LAWFUL Bard?!</blockquote><p>You can.Helaman wrote:Heck, why can't I have a LAWFUL Bard?!
You can.the majestic moose2012-04-05T07:24:14ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Joydhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#742012-04-05T07:12:24Z2012-04-05T07:12:24Z<p>Druid alignment restrictions are just bizarre, in love with their own cuteness. (Much like the "what sort of pretty picture can I make on the alignment grid by coloring in some of the squares. That looks pretty" method of generating alignment restrictions used with many latter-day 3.5 classes.) With a barbarian, you can at least say "Alignment restrictions may not make total sense, but if there have to be alignment restrictions on this class, non-lawful makes sense." Druids are held to one of five alignments that aren't even the five alignments I would pick as the most appropriate five for an archetypical druid. The justifications for why they have to be "any neutral" are even more ludicrous. Druids have to care about a balance between law and chaos, or they have to care about a balance between good and evil (the latter notion itself totally idiotic), but just one or the other. That's good enough. And caring about this balance has to be manifested in druids actually having an alignment with a neutral element. It's not like the game treats "affinity for nature" as consistently a neutral thing - all sorts of nature-y stuff has other alignments. Dang <i>dryads</i> are CG by default. The fact that druids can be LN and NE but can't be CG is pretty silly. I'm not saying that druids shouldn't be able to be LN or NE, just that those aren't particularly high on the list of "ways I'd describe the archetypical druid" - just like I think that rogues should be able to be LG, but if I were slapping alignment restrictions on the rogue I wouldn't say "rogues can be LG, but not CN."</p>Druid alignment restrictions are just bizarre, in love with their own cuteness. (Much like the "what sort of pretty picture can I make on the alignment grid by coloring in some of the squares. That looks pretty" method of generating alignment restrictions used with many latter-day 3.5 classes.) With a barbarian, you can at least say "Alignment restrictions may not make total sense, but if there have to be alignment restrictions on this class, non-lawful makes sense." Druids are held to one of...Joyd2012-04-05T07:12:24ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Gluttonhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#732012-04-05T04:57:53Z2012-04-05T04:57:53Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Sir Ophiuchus wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I believe it should be renamed "warp spasm".</p>
<p>:) </blockquote>I think I love you. </blockquote>But what are you so afraid of? </blockquote><p>I'm afraid that I'm not sure of a mummy rot there is no cure for.TriOmegaZero wrote:Sir Ophiuchus wrote: TriOmegaZero wrote:I believe it should be renamed "warp spasm".
:)
I think I love you. But what are you so afraid of? I'm afraid that I'm not sure of a mummy rot there is no cure for.Glutton2012-04-05T04:57:53ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?UltimaGabehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#722012-04-05T01:06:54Z2012-04-05T01:06:54Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Robespierre wrote:</div><blockquote>Why do the powers choose not to activate if your view of the world changes?</blockquote><p>Alignment isn't your view of the world- it's part of the core of what you are. If it was just a matter of how you view the world, then certain spells wouldn't hurt you more or less based on it. Your alignment can change your view of the world- but it's who you are.Robespierre wrote:Why do the powers choose not to activate if your view of the world changes?
Alignment isn't your view of the world- it's part of the core of what you are. If it was just a matter of how you view the world, then certain spells wouldn't hurt you more or less based on it. Your alignment can change your view of the world- but it's who you are.UltimaGabe2012-04-05T01:06:54ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?3.5 Loyalisthttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#712012-04-05T00:10:26Z2012-04-05T00:10:26Z<p>Welllll, the druid's philosophy is very neutral, they are attached to natural forces that are neutral, so they should probably be neutral.</p>Welllll, the druid's philosophy is very neutral, they are attached to natural forces that are neutral, so they should probably be neutral.3.5 Loyalist2012-04-05T00:10:26ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Loboluskhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#702012-04-04T19:01:01Z2012-04-04T19:01:01Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">3.5 Loyalist wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Finished up a game recently, the dm did away with alignments, he never liked them much.</p>
<p>Didn't change a great deal, the world was not flooded with lawful barbarians. He really pushed the religion heavy though. </p>
<p>I had fun playing a scout that if alignment was on, would have been NE to CE. It was weird how lawful the party actually was, they followed the carrots and served those in charge. This little thief though, no, he raided, he stole, he vomited in libraries and threw books, man was crazy. Sometimes he got really angry, pursuing vendettas. Now this was good and fun roleplaying, and yep, alignment is one of the optional rules of this game that isn't exactly needed to run fun games.</p>
<p>Without alignment (although I prefer to have it in) you can more assuredly play archetypes or characters without worrying about how lawful you are, or chaotic or whatever. An adventurer does as they see fit, and if you are a traditionalist northern barbarian that respects laws, traditions and hates the forces of chaos, that works too. </blockquote><p>I think this is my point, form a rules perspective It doesn't break anything. why restrict just this one class, we has a society have grown, the druid does not need to be neutral now....3.5 Loyalist wrote:Finished up a game recently, the dm did away with alignments, he never liked them much.
Didn't change a great deal, the world was not flooded with lawful barbarians. He really pushed the religion heavy though.
I had fun playing a scout that if alignment was on, would have been NE to CE. It was weird how lawful the party actually was, they followed the carrots and served those in charge. This little thief though, no, he raided, he stole, he vomited in libraries and threw...Lobolusk2012-04-04T19:01:01ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Gorbaczhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#692012-04-04T16:35:14Z2012-04-04T16:35:14Z<p>Paladin/Monks of Irori ftw.</p>Paladin/Monks of Irori ftw.Gorbacz2012-04-04T16:35:14ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Sir Ophiuchushttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#682012-04-04T16:34:02Z2012-04-04T16:34:02Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote> With good reason! I <i>am</i> a monk/paladin after all. </blockquote><p>I can't be tied down. I'm sorry. My <i>ring of freedom of movement</i> will always come between us.TriOmegaZero wrote:With good reason! I am a monk/paladin after all.
I can't be tied down. I'm sorry. My ring of freedom of movement will always come between us.Sir Ophiuchus2012-04-04T16:34:02ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?3.5 Loyalisthttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#672012-04-04T15:34:26Z2012-04-04T15:34:26Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote> With good reason! I <i>am</i> a monk/paladin after all. </blockquote><p>Hey. Pal. Don't make this weird.TriOmegaZero wrote:With good reason! I am a monk/paladin after all.
Hey. Pal. Don't make this weird.3.5 Loyalist2012-04-04T15:34:26ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?TriOmegaZerohttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#662012-04-04T16:33:24Z2012-04-04T13:54:23Z<p>With good reason! I <i>am</i> a monk/paladin after all.</p>With good reason! I am a monk/paladin after all.TriOmegaZero2012-04-04T13:54:23ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Sir Ophiuchushttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#652012-04-04T13:04:13Z2012-04-04T13:04:13Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Sir Ophiuchus wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I believe it should be renamed "warp spasm".</p>
<p>:) </blockquote>I think I love you. </blockquote>But what are you so afraid of? </blockquote><p>Grappling rules.TriOmegaZero wrote:Sir Ophiuchus wrote: TriOmegaZero wrote:I believe it should be renamed "warp spasm".
:)
I think I love you. But what are you so afraid of? Grappling rules.Sir Ophiuchus2012-04-04T13:04:13ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?3.5 Loyalisthttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#642012-04-04T12:30:28Z2012-04-04T12:30:28Z<p>Finished up a game recently, the dm did away with alignments, he never liked them much.</p>
<p>Didn't change a great deal, the world was not flooded with lawful barbarians. He really pushed the religion heavy though. </p>
<p>I had fun playing a scout that if alignment was on, would have been NE to CE. It was weird how lawful the party actually was, they followed the carrots and served those in charge. This little thief though, no, he raided, he stole, he vomited in libraries and threw books, man was crazy. Sometimes he got really angry, pursuing vendettas. Now this was good and fun roleplaying, and yep, alignment is one of the optional rules of this game that isn't exactly needed to run fun games.</p>
<p>Without alignment (although I prefer to have it in) you can more assuredly play archetypes or characters without worrying about how lawful you are, or chaotic or whatever. An adventurer does as they see fit, and if you are a traditionalist northern barbarian that respects laws, traditions and hates the forces of chaos, that works too.</p>Finished up a game recently, the dm did away with alignments, he never liked them much.
Didn't change a great deal, the world was not flooded with lawful barbarians. He really pushed the religion heavy though.
I had fun playing a scout that if alignment was on, would have been NE to CE. It was weird how lawful the party actually was, they followed the carrots and served those in charge. This little thief though, no, he raided, he stole, he vomited in libraries and threw books, man was...3.5 Loyalist2012-04-04T12:30:28ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?TriOmegaZerohttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#632012-04-04T03:49:19Z2012-04-04T03:49:19Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Sir Ophiuchus wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I believe it should be renamed "warp spasm".</p>
<p>:) </blockquote>I think I love you. </blockquote><p>But what are you so afraid of?Sir Ophiuchus wrote:TriOmegaZero wrote:I believe it should be renamed "warp spasm".
:)
I think I love you. But what are you so afraid of?TriOmegaZero2012-04-04T03:49:19ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Sir Ophiuchushttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#622012-04-02T01:59:48Z2012-04-02T01:59:48Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I believe it should be renamed "warp spasm".</p>
<p>:) </blockquote><p>I think I love you.TriOmegaZero wrote:I believe it should be renamed "warp spasm".
:)
I think I love you.Sir Ophiuchus2012-04-02T01:59:48ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Steve Geddeshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#612012-04-01T23:27:36Z2012-04-01T23:27:36Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Robespierre wrote:</div><blockquote> The limitation doesn't seem to make sense to me. Why do the powers choose not to activate if your view of the world changes? That just doesn't make any sense. Unless barbarians access their power from some chaos warp. Then we need to reflavor what the barbarian really is. </blockquote><p>I agree with those above who cite the "reason" as being legacy issues.
</p>
.
<br />
However, I suspect the deeper cause is the perenniel problem D&D has always had with explaining what the chaos-law axis of alignment is supposed to represent. Although good-evil is a relatively straightforward moral calculus (conceptually, if not in detail) it's not really clear how law-chaos fits into a moral scheme. It seems to me people often define this axis based on personality traits - "lawful people are methodical, calculated, reasoned people and chaotic are unpredictable, emotive and irrational". That's not my preferred take on alignment, but it's relatively common.</p>
<p>As such, the 'no lawful berserk ragers' could be seen as defensible (even if not necessary) on the grounds that an essential component of 'rage' is losing one's rational control and overriding our ingrained sense of self preservation (a chaotic tendency on the above 'personality based' law-chaos dimension).</p>Robespierre wrote:The limitation doesn't seem to make sense to me. Why do the powers choose not to activate if your view of the world changes? That just doesn't make any sense. Unless barbarians access their power from some chaos warp. Then we need to reflavor what the barbarian really is.
I agree with those above who cite the "reason" as being legacy issues.
.
However, I suspect the deeper cause is the perenniel problem D&D has always had with explaining what the chaos-law axis of...Steve Geddes2012-04-01T23:27:36ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Helamanhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#602012-04-01T23:19:54Z2012-04-01T23:19:54Z<p>Then house rule it.</p>Then house rule it.Helaman2012-04-01T23:19:54ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Robespierre (alias of Black_Lantern)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#592012-04-06T08:29:52Z2012-04-01T22:58:19Z<p>The limitation doesn't seem to make sense to me. Why do the powers choose not to activate if your view of the world changes? That just doesn't make any sense. Unless barbarians access their power from some chaos warp. Then we need to reflavor what the barbarian really is.</p>The limitation doesn't seem to make sense to me. Why do the powers choose not to activate if your view of the world changes? That just doesn't make any sense. Unless barbarians access their power from some chaos warp. Then we need to reflavor what the barbarian really is.Robespierre (alias of Black_Lantern)2012-04-01T22:58:19ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Loboluskhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#582012-04-01T16:18:23Z2012-04-01T16:18:23Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Gorbacz wrote:</div><blockquote> We totally need a counter-thread named "So I am chaotic now and I can't calm down?". </blockquote><p>+1Gorbacz wrote:We totally need a counter-thread named "So I am chaotic now and I can't calm down?".
+1Lobolusk2012-04-01T16:18:23ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Gorbaczhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#572012-04-06T08:29:38Z2012-04-01T10:19:21Z<p>We totally need a counter-thread named "So I am chaotic now and I can't calm down?".</p>We totally need a counter-thread named "So I am chaotic now and I can't calm down?".Gorbacz2012-04-01T10:19:21ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Remco Sommelinghttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#562012-04-01T10:17:47Z2012-04-01T10:17:47Z<p>I think alignment restrictions make perfect sense in many cases, they prevent mixing and matching with other classes that are hard to combine from an RP or power/mechanic PoV. </p>
<p>I think in a homebrew game these things can be safely ignored for advanced gaming groups, if everyone at your game table agrees you should have no problem having the restriction lifted, as a GM I do so on a case by case basis if I like the concept and it isn't just a way to metagame into greater attack bonus and the like. Someone already mentioned martial artist making it quite possible to play a barbarian/monk.</p>I think alignment restrictions make perfect sense in many cases, they prevent mixing and matching with other classes that are hard to combine from an RP or power/mechanic PoV.
I think in a homebrew game these things can be safely ignored for advanced gaming groups, if everyone at your game table agrees you should have no problem having the restriction lifted, as a GM I do so on a case by case basis if I like the concept and it isn't just a way to metagame into greater attack bonus and the...Remco Sommeling2012-04-01T10:17:47ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?pobbeshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#552012-04-01T07:53:27Z2012-04-01T07:53:27Z<p>It seems a to be lawful vs. chaotic thing played out in the emotional vs. rational court. So, in a rage, the barbarian chooses to embrace the emotional visceral reaction to combat and go crazy. While raging, a barbarian cannot choose to really do anything other than fight or flight. You forgo decision making in favor of quick action and reaction.
<br />
This is opposed by the inability to make checks or concentrate. Basically, the barbarian in a rage can't use reason just response. A lawful person just won't discard his ability to reason his ability to be in control. That is why they won't rage. Someone mentioned the number of seconds in a day that one is raged versus not-raged, but alignment isn't a game of statistics. It a question of how do you act when everything is on the line. A lawful character clings to his reason when his life is on the line in combat, that is what makes him lawful. He doesn't think that he can just abandon reason when it's most convenient just as good characters don't commit evil acts when they are more convenient.
<br />
This is the argument that these things don't fit with the Urban archetype, and I agree my argument doesn't hold there, but I think that's just a kind of leftover you get from the way archetype class design works in PF. You can always try to convince your DM otherwise.</p>It seems a to be lawful vs. chaotic thing played out in the emotional vs. rational court. So, in a rage, the barbarian chooses to embrace the emotional visceral reaction to combat and go crazy. While raging, a barbarian cannot choose to really do anything other than fight or flight. You forgo decision making in favor of quick action and reaction.
This is opposed by the inability to make checks or concentrate. Basically, the barbarian in a rage can't use reason just response. A lawful person...pobbes2012-04-01T07:53:27ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So I am lawful now and I can't get angry?Helamanhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nv4j&page=2?So-I-am-lawful-now-and-I-cant-get-angry#542012-04-01T02:58:15Z2012-04-01T02:58:15Z<p>So no rage in 2nd ed, even as part of a kit? So it seems rage is not tied to 'chaos' as much as Barbarians can't be lawful and therefore rage (being a Barb class feature) cannot be lawful. Still can see the legacy roots at play.</p>So no rage in 2nd ed, even as part of a kit? So it seems rage is not tied to 'chaos' as much as Barbarians can't be lawful and therefore rage (being a Barb class feature) cannot be lawful. Still can see the legacy roots at play.Helaman2012-04-01T02:58:15Z