Hail again O noble gamers!
A player in my group claims to be playing a barbarian but in fact he is far closer to a thug; big, stupid, lazy, violent, greedy and extremly cowardy (he NEVER charges and actually hid behind a girl's back once...) and his character is like that too.
Anyway, so I have been thinking what would be the attributes of the thug character, not the thieving type but the "me-break-you-like-a-twig" type, the big bad brute who is at heart at coward but also a sadist and well... a thug.
So, what do you think, what will the thug core class look like and what feats and features are best suited for him?
Most Humbly,
Uri.
Here's a groovy anecdote for ya.
The English word "thug" was born from the Indian "thuggees" who worshipped Kali, and feared not death. They were kinda whacko assassin culties...
Of course, of course... but I was refering more to the stereotypical bully described by the English word "thug" rather than the Sanskrit word that refered to a buch of sickos who ended their life at the end of a british noose.
And here's an anecdote for you, assassin comes from Arabic Hasheshin, which means Eater of Hashish (marjiuna) and refers to the holy warriors' (Fidayeen) habbit to consume drugs before going on a suicide mission, a tradition practiced to this very day.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Remove every other fighter feat and give the class the rage ability (as barbarian), keep the d12 hit die, use fighter skill points, and keep the barbarian armor and weapon proficiencies (no heavy armor and no tower shields). Saves and BAB are the same for both classes so don't change those either. I would keep the fighter skill list except swap Handle Animal and Ride for Sense Motive and Intimidate (if fighters already get Intimidate, go with Knowledge (Local) instead). To reflect the cowardly aspect, I'd remove the bonus to saves against fear and the Indominable Will abilities from the rage progression.
Therefore, your first 10 levels should look like this (I can't remember what level barbarians get greater rage, but throw that in wherever it fits):
BAB Ft Rf Wi Special
+1 +2 +0 +0 Rage 1/day
+2 +3 +0 +0 Bonus Feat
+3 +3 +1 +1
+4 +4 +1 +1 Rage 2/day
+5 +4 +1 +1
+6 +5 +2 +2 Bonus Feat
+7 +5 +2 +2
+8 +6 +2 +2 Rage 3/day
+9 +6 +3 +3
+10 +7 +3 +3 Bonus Feat
|
You might consider balancing this class as an NPC class rather than a PC class. (As a general thing rather than for this particular PC, of course.)
Based on that paradigm, I'd consider a d10 HD, High FORT save, 3/4 BAB (thugs tend to not be well trained), Rage, Improved Unarmed Combat, Improved Grapple, maybe a bonus to Intimidate increasing with level.
This could be useful as an alternative to Warrior.
I don't think thugs should have rage because rage lowers your AC hence it's an act of courage (or at leasr recklessness). BTW, in my campagin rage is called amok and takes 1 full round to initate(a round spent biting your shield, scratching your shield, drooling over your beard, etc...)
I like the intimidate bonus though, an idea: what if the thug gets bonuses only against opponents scared of him (a.k.a his victims "sava" against his Intimidate skill)
|
|
I don't think thugs should have rage because rage lowers your AC hence it's an act of courage (or at leasr recklessness). BTW, in my campagin rage is called amok and takes 1 full round to initate(a round spent biting your shield, scratching your shield, drooling over your beard, etc...)
I like the intimidate bonus though, an idea: what if the thug gets bonuses only against opponents scared of him (a.k.a his victims "sava" against his Intimidate skill)
Very reasonable. Frankly, the Improved Unarmed Combat feat is a bit of a stretch too, since it allows you to go up against weapons with bare hands. Not really the sort of thing stereotypical thugs are known for. Extra damage (or maybe an extra attack?) against Demoralized opponents could work pretty well.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Extra damage (or maybe an extra attack?) against Demoralized opponents could work pretty well.
Yeah, I can agree with that. Take my previous recommendations but replace rage with the following ability:
Beatdown (Ex): At 1st level, a Thug gains the ability to deal additional damage against opponents who show fear. Any successful melee attack made by a Thug against an opponent who is shaken or panicked deals an additional 2 points of damage. This bonus increased by 2 at 4th level and every 4 levels afterwards (8th, 12th, 16th, 20th). Creatures that are immune to criticals are immune to this extra damage. (Note that the fear effect need not be caused by the Thug himself.)
I would also remove the various 'fighter only' feats from the eligible bonus feats list and add Skill Focus (Intimidate) (or you could just replace the 2nd level bonus feat WITH said Skill Focus). The Beatdown ability is balanced with the ranger's Favored Enemy bonuses because it ONLY applies to damage (specifically melee damage, even) AND creatures can make saves against fear conditions.
Something else that a Thug could get at 1st level:
Spineless (Ex): A Thug receives a -2 morale penalty on saves against fear but has a +4 morale bonus on saves against compulsion effects that would put him in direct danger (such as a hold person spell cast on him in the midst of a melee).
Thugs. Hmmm. They're really brave when they've got friends around, aren't they? Get them alone and it's a bit different.
Here you go.
Use the Warrior NPC class as written in the DMG, just rename it "Thug". Give the class Bluff and Intimidate as class skills and add the following.
False Bravado (Ex): At heart, all thugs are simply bullies that display an outward toughness to hide their true cowardice. At 1st level, a Thug character that takes damage from an opponent must succeed on a Will save (DC 10 + 1/2 damage taken) or flee from his enemies. Treat this as a fear effect. The Thug may not attempt to attack the enemy that wounded him for 24 hours (when he gets his courage back up).
Strength in Numbers (Ex): Thugs are a fearsome lot when they have allies with them. At 3rd level, a Thug with 2 or more allies within 5 ft. of him is immune to fear effects except for the effects of his own False Bravado. However, as long as a Thug has at least 2 allies within 5 ft., he gains a +1 morale bonus (per ally) on his Will save to resist the effects of his False Bravado if he takes damage.
In addition, for each ally within 5 ft. of the Thug, he gains a +1 morale bonus on melee attack rolls.
Cowardly Strike (Ex): A thug is a tricky opponent that attempts combat maneuvers that most warriors consider dishonorable or "dirty". At 5th level, a Thug may take a -4 penalty to his attack roll to hamper (attacks to its feet or legs that halve its movement rate), nauseate (an attack to the groin) or blind its opponent (gouge the eyes). Each condition lasts a number of rounds equal to the Thugs class levels. However, if the attack to blind an opponent is made with a manufactured weapon the condition is permanent.
Bonus Feat: At 5th level, a Thug gains Improved Feint as a bonus feat whether he qualifies for it or not.
I would leave this is a 5-level progression character or NPC class. I may have to try it out myself. :)
What's wrong with a fighter?
Thugs. Hmmm. They're really brave when they've got friends around, aren't they? Get them alone and it's a bit different.
Here you go.
Use the Warrior NPC class as written in the DMG, just rename it "Thug". Give the class Bluff and Intimidate as class skills and add the following.
False Bravado (Ex): At heart, all thugs are simply bullies that display an outward toughness to hide their true cowardice. At 1st level, a Thug character that takes damage from an opponent must succeed on a Will save (DC 10 + 1/2 damage taken) or flee from his enemies. Treat this as a fear effect. The Thug may not attempt to attack the enemy that wounded him for 24 hours (when he gets his courage back up).
Strength in Numbers (Ex): Thugs are a fearsome lot when they have allies with them. At 3rd level, a Thug with 2 or more allies within 5 ft. of him is immune to fear effects except for the effects of his own False Bravado. However, as long as a Thug has at least 2 allies within 5 ft., he gains a +1 morale bonus (per ally) on his Will save to resist the effects of his False Bravado if he takes damage.
In addition, for each ally within 5 ft. of the Thug, he gains a +1 morale bonus on melee attack rolls.
Cowardly Strike (Ex): A thug is a tricky opponent that attempts combat maneuvers that most warriors consider dishonorable or "dirty". At 5th level, a Thug may take a -4 penalty to his attack roll to hamper (attacks to its feet or legs that halve its movement rate), nauseate (an attack to the groin) or blind its opponent (gouge the eyes). Each condition lasts a number of rounds equal to the Thugs class levels. However, if the attack to blind an opponent is made with a manufactured weapon the condition is permanent.
Bonus Feat: At 5th level, a Thug gains Improved Feint as a bonus feat whether he qualifies for it or not.
I would leave this is a 5-level progression character or NPC class. I may have to try it out myself. :)
Excellent! Just what I was looking for, thanks.
I can appreciate this design interest as an exploration of creativity, but I would have to say that "thug" is a better role-playing thing than something to name a class (I also dislike the choice of names for the "knight" class in the PHBII for the same reason). Any barbarian, fighter, or warrior NPC makes an excellent thug. It's easy to roleplay their "false baravado" and determine when they would run away. It's just not something I see as being worth the time to design, but I see that such time has already been taken, so carry on!
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Cowardly Strike (Ex): A thug is a tricky opponent that attempts combat maneuvers that most warriors consider dishonorable or "dirty". At 5th level, a Thug may take a -4 penalty to his attack roll to hamper (attacks to its feet or legs that halve its movement rate), nauseate (an attack to the groin) or blind its opponent (gouge the eyes). Each condition lasts a number of rounds equal to the Thugs class levels. However, if the attack to blind an opponent is made with a manufactured weapon the condition is permanent.
I would say that the condition is removed if the character is healed for an amount equal to the damage dealt by the attack in this case. It would have to be magical healing though, not natural. However, remove blindness/deafness would probably NOT work against a blinded condition of this type.
Cowardly Strike (Ex): A thug is a tricky opponent that attempts combat maneuvers that most warriors consider dishonorable or "dirty". At 5th level, a Thug may take a -4 penalty to his attack roll to hamper (attacks to its feet or legs that halve its movement rate), nauseate (an attack to the groin) or blind its opponent (gouge the eyes). Each condition lasts a number of rounds equal to the Thugs class levels. However, if the attack to blind an opponent is made with a manufactured weapon the condition is permanent.I would say that the condition is removed if the character is healed for an amount equal to the damage dealt by the attack in this case. It would have to be magical healing though, not natural. However, remove blindness/deafness would probably NOT work against a blinded condition of this type.
Yep. Good points.
For the record, my ideas were from the hip, so anyone is welcome to improve them or make them more doable. I would only play this character as an NPC or allow it as a player character for a non-serious game since it's basically a joke class.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I would only play this character as an NPC or allow it as a player character for a non-serious game since it's basically a joke class.
Agreed. This is not really 'adventurer' material. I played a cowardly rogue in a serious campaign before but there was no MECHANICAL cowardice... he just preferred to fight on his own terms (and with as little chance of retaliation as possible).
I played a cowardly rogue in a serious campaign before but there was no MECHANICAL cowardice... he just preferred to fight on his own terms (and with as little chance of retaliation as possible).The question then, is: can a coward rage? it seems unlikely to me that a cold and calculated killer will be able to do something as reckless and crude.
I'd allow a cure blindness/deafness to work on any form of blindness/deafness. Never mind that "it's a congenital defect" malarkey in the Istivin trilogy - second level spells should be able to restore lost sight unless more powerful magic like a sort of curse is involved.
I can appreciate this design interest as an exploration of creativity, but I would have to say that "thug" is a better role-playing thing than something to name a class (I also dislike the choice of names for the "knight" class in the PHBII for the same reason). Any barbarian, fighter, or warrior NPC makes an excellent thug...
I second that!
Simple character concepts (like a thug) deserve simple character builds (like a fighter). In fact, almost all character concepts would work fine with just rules out of the PHB.
IMHO, of course :)
Jack
Cowardly Strike (Ex): A thug is a tricky opponent that attempts combat maneuvers that most warriors consider dishonorable or "dirty"...
For the record, in real life (and likely in many D&D campaigns) there's no such thing as dishonorable or 'dirty' moves for a professional fighter -- whatever wins the fight is fair.
This kind of ability would arguably be useable by any character whenever they wanted to fight dirty. IMC this is already assumed to be part of normal combat.
Regards,
Jack
|
I'd allow a cure blindness/deafness to work on any form of blindness/deafness. Never mind that "it's a congenital defect" malarkey in the Istivin trilogy - second level spells should be able to restore lost sight unless more powerful magic like a sort of curse is involved.
I agree. I think that magical healing should not restore sight when this ability is used, and the only remove blindness/deafness or its equivalent should overcome the condition caused by this class feature.
This thread highlights a lot of things to the do with the D&D game. Here are two I have been able to dredge up:
1. Designing new classes (or new anything) is an incredibly difficult process. Abilities that sound cool in theory end up being unworkable in practice. For instance, the thug's abilities (as envisaged by some people on this thread) make him far better than any other NPC class in the DMG, but weaker than barbarians, paladins, rangers, or 90% of the prestige classes out there. I can't see any PC willingly subjecting himself to a class ability that has no redeeming features (false bravado). Several of the abilities also have serious loop-holes such as the cowardly strike ability, which is too powerful as written (no save, etc). I have a DM who makes up new abilities for classes and races all the time, but can never really answer the question why? That is my question for this class.
2. When can an archetype be transformed into a class? People like Saern have a problem with the word knight being used in a class sense, but what makes the word knight different from the word assassin or rogue or barbarian or paladin? The dictionary meaning of barbarian is not a savage warrior who flies into a rage. That's a berserker. A barbarian is simply an uncouth person from a primitive culture. The D&D knight is not the knight of legend or history, though they may resemble some of them. Remember, it is we humans who give meaning to the symbols (words) not the other way around. I do think that too many new PC classes are being created, though. When will it stop, and when 4th Edition finally comes along which ones will they include? I personally know a lot of people who like scouts and warlocks better than paladins or bards. Why should the old classes always get preference?
There is nothing that says a barbarian has to be brave or courageous; perhaps his rage is how he hides his fear. Being a barbarian only means they are not civilized or rather have not conformed to city life with all its social contracts, norms and social ettiquette. Barbarians usually have contempt for such things as being weak or enslaving the spirit and nature of the individual; which it does. When you read the Viking Sagas, it becomes obvious that their are various archtypes of barbarians; the one you described is certainly one of them