The appearance of a Warrior - discuss

[Lightning]

I've always pictured the warrior as the one who "gets the job done". The armour is functional but not necessarily symbolic (as it is for paladins, dread knights and inquisitors). It may be old and worn, but it will be well cared for because to a career warrior his equipment comes first - in the field you'll sharpen your sword before seeing to your own wounds, you never know when it could save your life. Symoblism may come in if he is fighting for an army and is wearing their colours or emblem.

In the end, I guess my view of warriors is of bluntness embodied in the phrase "if it moves, hit it 'til it stops" We're not fighting for some higher cause as decreed by the gods - we're fighting for ourselves, our country, our friends, our loved ones or our principals...

A warrior is not a religious mouthpiece or enforcer, a warrior simply is.

[Lightning]

No-one else have an opinion?

[TheDrunkenDwarf]

I see warriors as having a wide range of appearances. The other tank classes are united by common motivations and philosophies, but warriors have as many different motivations as there are warriors.

I agree that a warrior's equipment will be meticulously cared for, but some will be stylish and others cobbled together. Some will have a noble appearance, some plain, and some will have a darker look.

I don't think they lend themselves to a "class description" nearly as well as the other classes.

[Lightning]

Yes, that is pretty much in line with my view of the warrior - we are individuals, and as many as there are leaves on trees =^.^=

[Eclipse]

Originally Posted by Lightning

Yes, that is pretty much in line with my view of the warrior - we are individuals, and as many as there are leaves on trees =^.^=

/barf on sentimentalism!
lol j/k

you guys and how you think you control your own fate, lol so cute.

/e manipulates some more

-Eclipse

[Lightning]

Originally Posted by Eclipse

you guys and how you think you control your own fate, lol so cute.

/e manipulates some more

Says you, grey robe boy

[Glauroth]

I always see the warrior as the guy who uses every kind of weapon...when I think of Dread Knight, I think of spiked weapons. When I think of Paladin, I think of sword and shield. And when I think of Inquisitor, well, I've never seen the Inquisitor implemented yet. Monks will have their sticks. Berserkers with the two-handed weapons. Rangers and bows. Just my opinion.

Warriors don't really have a set image, they just kind of have a role to fulfill, which is flexible, good damage, best at taking hits and keeping aggro in the traditional sense. And of course, no magic, just brute strength.

[Tudana]

I have always liked playing a Warrior, I think mainly for the strength factor they represent. All ways standing tall out front and at the ready for any sign of movement toward thier companions. Nothing surprizes a good Warrior, even if it (mob) tries to surpirze her, she will always be as ready as if she seen it coming.

As for what a warrior looks like to me...Solid in body and frame, a vision of fierce brute force. Appearance in gear will differ, depends on where she`s from and what hardships have befallen her. I just cant picture a warrior in the courts of a king, pampered or clean.
Even if she attempts to clean up for a royal event, you will see dirt under her nails, or boots dusty.

Weapons are second nature to a warrior, only behind breathing, eating, relieving themselves behind a bush :wink: In a fight if a warrior is disarmed, do not think you have the advantage over her, if there is a stick near her feet you might find it in your eye before you can swing again.
Warriors really have no rules of engagment, its win by any means possible, even if they have to use your own leg to kill you with.

[Lightning]

Originally Posted by Tudana

Warriors really have no rules of engagment, its win by any means possible, even if they have to use your own leg to kill you with.

Mmmm, beating someone to death with their own leg - a warrior after my own heart

[Delune]

Ive allways liked the idea of a fast cunning warrior and one of my favorite images of what a warrior is, was achilles from TROY and when he took down that giant dude in the beggining allmost brought a tear to my eye. i played eq for 5 years and my char was a wood elf warrior and i think my main goal was to show people that you didnt need an ogre warrior or troll warrior to get things done just cause they were huge and had more hp. i never liked the bigger races for that. but the warrior will allways be my favorite for sure. i dont think there should have ever been a berserker class either because i beleive thats part of a warriors trait also, berserking , incredible amounts of rage dulling any pain we feal so we can get the job done, while also increasing our speed to make us scary =o, anyways back to achilles when he was storming the beach by himself, he was untouchable, because he was skilled - thats how it should be, shouldnt matter what armor your wearing i dont think, plate armors cool and all but if smaller races were to really wear full plate armor someone could push them over and they wouldnt be able to get back up, and forget dodging things in full plate. -my 2cp. anyways, yeah i hope wood elves can be warriors in vanguard also. and if you allready know let me know =p