
Grizzled Gryphon |

This strange man came to the village. He was dressed weird, and talked weird, and our women were bigger and stronger than him. He was rather sad, so we didn't kill him. Poor, pathetic excuse for a man, really.
But then he started teaching us things. Amazing things we had never thought of! So after the hundreth amazing thing he taught us, the Chief asked, 'how do you know all these things?' And the man pulled out this strange object, and said 'Books.'
So, the chief tells me to go and learn from this man all that you can. Get all the knowledge from the books that you can, that we may also know all these amazing things! So, I went to the man, and started trying to glean the knowledge from the book. But it wouldn't tell me anything. The man laughed, and told me I needed to learn to read. And so I did. After that, I found that there were MILLIONS of books, some useful, some not, but they were all far to the south.
And so, the Chief sent my Barbarian, along with the strange man, down to the south to gather books and knowledge, and bring it back to the people.
There is the gist of the background of my book loving Barbarian. I took the Berserker of the Society trait, and one that makes Linguistics a class skill. I have made him an Invulnerable Rager Archetype with the Superstitious Rage Power (along with the Human Racial Bonus, of course).
Here is the prob I have. I am very interested in the role-play aspect of the game, so for me, there is a real issue of my character using magic items, let alone letting anyone cast magic on me! However, this will REALLY nerf my character, so how do I go about using the magic items, and allow friendly magic, while still using Superstitious? Just seems the two don't go together.
I could say that I don't like "bad medicine", and the resistance I have just happens to block "good medicine", too. Except if I was in that situation, and my "stop bad medicine" ability stopped my allies magic, then I would be mighty pissed at that supposed ally, and want a real good explanation of why he tried to cast bad medicine on me???
I suppose I could say he is rational enough to know that this is just a case of "all or nothing", and it works on all magic, but I just don't see most barbarians be all that rational. Rational just doesn't seem to fit the barbarian feel, to me.
Any ideas?

MrSin |

Here is the prob I have. I am very interested in the roll-play aspect of the game, so for me, there is a real issue of my character using magic items, let alone letting anyone cast magic on me! However, this will REALLY nerf my character, so how do I go about using the magic items, and allow friendly magic, while still using Superstitious? Just seems the two don't go together.
I don't get it, why can't you wear magic items? Nothing about superstitious makes it so you can't wear a magical pair of boots or a belt, or a use a magical sword.

Grizzled Gryphon |

I know that nothing says you can't use magic items, but just the idea of being superstitious would imply the character would be loathe to use magic items. I am looking at this from the role-playing aspect, not the RAW aspect. Nothing in the superstitious power says you can't just have beneficial spells cast on you before you rage, either.
BUT, thematically, it feels wrong to let magic be cast on him, or to knowingly use a magic item. I am looking for viable reasons that he would not mind having good magic cast on him or use magic items.

Arachnofiend |

When your Barbarian is not raging, he is in full control of his senses and recognizes good squishy man cast good spell that make fly and stuff. Is good.
When your Barbarian is raging, he is not so smart and resists all spells. He is also not so smart and therefore doesn't realize that the magic he's already benefiting from (pre-rage buffs and magic items) aren't just things he can do because he's that badass.

MrSin |

I am looking at this from the role-playing aspect
Come up with your own? Your the one coming up with reasons why not to do it. Its all in your head man. Your playing a guy who came from an actual illiterate barbarian tribe and married to the concept of "MAGIC AM BAD!".
Its one thing to wear a belt or accept the buff from a friend in the society, and another to dodge a fireball. Its also different to be raging and not, for a dozen reasons.

Steve Geddes |

There is the gist of the background of my book loving Barbarian. I took the Berserker of the Society trait, and one that makes Linguistics a class skill. I have made him an Invulnerable Rager Archetype with the Superstitious Rage Power (along with the Human Racial Bonus, of course).
Here is the prob I have. I am very interested in the role-play aspect of the game, so for me, there is a real issue of my character using magic items, let alone letting anyone cast magic on me! However, this will REALLY nerf my character, so how do I go about using the magic items, and allow friendly magic, while still using Superstitious? Just seems the two don't go together.
I could say that I don't like "bad medicine", and the resistance I have just happens to block "good medicine", too. Except if I was in that situation, and my "stop bad medicine" ability stopped my allies magic, then I would be mighty pissed at that supposed ally, and want a real good explanation of why he tried to cast bad medicine on me???
I suppose I could say he is rational enough to know that this is just a case of "all or nothing", and it works on all magic, but I just don't see most barbarians be all that rational. Rational just doesn't seem to fit the barbarian feel, to me.
Any ideas?
I think a roleplaying solution is best. So that each morning, he burns incense and prays to his ancestors, totem spirits, gods or whatever to bless his magic items (and give him the strength to tolerate their "taint" for the day). Basically, I'd treat them as a necessary evil - he doesnt like them, but realises that they're much better than non-magic stuff (and a warrior who refuses to use everything at his disposal to defend his tribe is a fool).
Similarly, I'd make him uncomfortable receiving friendly magic, even when not raging. However, it's only when he's lost control a little and gone all ragey that he's actually forced to resist friendly spells.

Steve Geddes |

I know that nothing says you can't use magic items, but just the idea of being superstitious would imply the character would be loathe to use magic items. I am looking at this from the role-playing aspect, not the RAW aspect. Nothing in the superstitious power says you can't just have beneficial spells cast on you before you rage, either.
BUT, thematically, it feels wrong to let magic be cast on him, or to knowingly use a magic item. I am looking for viable reasons that he would not mind having good magic cast on him or use magic items.
Another option would be a certain, self-serving selectivity - "I dont use your black magic weapons, armor and wands. However, THIS spear was sent to me by the spirits!" Every magic item he wanted to keep would be rationalised as being ordained or excepted in some way. The ones he has no use for would be spurned as untrustworthy/evil/etcetera.
I think that kind of blinkered cognitive dissonance is eminently realistic, even if irrational.

Steve Geddes |

A final option would be to ask your DM for some kind of alternate, innate bonus to replace magic items. Maybe he gets very expensive, rare tattoos which coincidentally cost the same as the equivalent set of magic items and which grant similar to hit/damage/DR-piercing abilities. Personally, I'd allow this and balance the fact you cant be disarmed of your magic bonus by having other limitations (like they can be dispelled, they dont work at night, during summer, underground, or something - though those all seem a trifle harsh).
I've also played in a game where magic items improved as characters levelled (roughly in line with WBL) - that way he could have non-magic, named family weapons and armor which have been passed down from father to son and gradually become legendary in their own right. You kind of lose the "loot the bodies" feel of traditional D&D games, but that was part of the attraction for us.