How do you roleplay as a perfect warrior in any rpg setting?

How do you roleplay as a perfect warrior in any rpg setting?

Just be a dumb brute and walk through everything?

That's a pretty subjective question.

Personally my favorite warrior archetypes are the ones who don't have Valhalla complexes or dumbass weaby motivations like "I wanna be the strongest". To me, the perfect warrior is the guy who puts his friends, loved ones, and/or country first and the dedication to martial prowess comes as a byproduct of that. Basically, I like the whole Navy SEAL sheepdog power fantasy.

>. To me, the perfect warrior is the guy who puts his friends, loved ones, and/or country first and the dedication to martial prowess comes as a byproduct of that
No, that's a soldier.

Yeah and I like it better than 4 Int BarbarianGuy or Anime Mercenary Man

I think things through in a tactical, and depending on the current location possibly subdued as well, manner then run the plans by the group to see which they think would work out best and why mostly then work out kinks until we have something usable. Usually if it's combat related we have some idea of a formation and roles planned out ahead of time unless i dropped the ball and usually this means I'm vanguard or at least I'm sharing the front. Otherwise, I'm there to make sure they don't burn down the dukes manse or to remind them there are civilians within that spells radius.
It sounds like a job anybody could do, and maybe it is, but I've seen what my group does when they don't have a coordinator, or a limiter, or a reliable frontman in combat so that's my job.

>Just be a dumb brute and walk through everything?
No, that's how you roleplay a dumb brute that walks through everything.

That's not a warrior, that's a tactician.

So, warrior.

>ITT user insists any other idea of what a warrior may be is actually a different thing
Have fun user.

He's probably one of those guys who thinks there needs to be like 80 different classes to cover every possible niche a PC could occupy.

I was actually just praying that he plays a classless system so his GM doesn't want to kill himself.

>No, GM, that's a Rogue. I specifically said I wanted to play a Shadowhunter.

Pic related is my favourite way to roleplay a warrior. Barbarism isn't stupidity.

The one can fight but it is also easy to replace if he dies.

...

tacticool operator: medieval mercenary edition

God what I'd give for a woman with thighs like that.

>his homebrew doesn't have separate classes for
>soldier
>warrior
>fighter
>thug
>brute
>brawler
>archer
>slinger
>greek fire thrower
>mercenary
>hired blade
>sellsword
>hoplite
>myrmidon (its just a better hoplite, learn to system mastery)
>rifleman
>musketeer
>arquebusier
>cannoneer
>pirate
>knight
>man at arms
>fighting man
>bodyguard
>viking
>underworld enforcer
>naval officer
>squire
>battle nun
>crossbow prostitute
>landsknecht
>land snake
>murder hobo
>adventurer (mundane-melee)
Laughing at your shitty rule lite system desu, might as well just freeform rp on a forum.

Conan was a rogue.

I agree.

This is not a warrior, this is ranger or rogue.

Let's quote some dead guy.
>To achieve 100 victories in 100 battles is not the zenith of skill. To defeat your enemies without fighting is the zenith of skill.

SUN ZOO SAID THAT, AND I THINK HE KNOWS A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WAR THAN YOU DO, PAL, BECAUSE HE INVENTED IT!

>myrmidon

Fucking Achilles and his retarded special snowflake army. Literally the Ultramarines of classical mythology

Basically just role play Conan the Barbarian.

Using Arnold's voice is optional but recommended.

But that's a rogue.

He was pretty obviously a Cimmerian (male).

Can a woman be Cimmerian(male)?

Shame they all died.

Don't start that.

Is the guy on the lefting getting the succ?

A good warrior is one who is methodical, take no risk, good with his words and don't bother himself with the story behind every given tasks. To be a perfect warrior mean you have to turn yourself into a reliable weapon that can be direct to whatever your owner want to, and get paid doing so.
Any of that roam and wander type travellers that fight for the innocents and shit is more ronin/ranger/barbarian if anything, you can't be the perfect warrior if you're just a murderhobo walking the earth

My game has this mercenary group called The Followers of Mattithias, the man himself was a religious scholar who supposedly was divinly inspired to master every weapon ever created, and the madman actually did it. His devotees follow in his footsteps, abandoning everything, from their livlihoods to their base desires, to master every weapon ever devised. His followers travel far and wide, spreading the good word of warfare and assisting the needy whenever possible, if only to sneak in a bit of instruction. They own naught but the gear they carry, of which every article can be used as a weapon.

To the common man, a Follower appears as a mass of bladed, blunted, and spiked instruments, concealed by a cloak of knives and a razor-rimmed straw hat. He will make haste towards the local law enforcement in the area, and peddle his expirience as an instructor. After the local guard is competant to his liking, he'll bugger off, solving local disputes and bearing gifts of armaments to children as he wanders off to the next town.

Being the murderhobos we are, we of course, joined them, and now follow the 8-hooked Chakram to Enlightenment.

Meanwhile, there is only one wizard class that can perform any kind of magic available.

The apex warrior is typically portrayed as a mythical hero. They aren't just the unstoppable force against which all immovable objects fail, or vice versa. They are paragons of their character who don't falter in their ideals but aren't afraid to learn. They are smart in how they conduct themselves in battle and do what is necessary to ensure total victory, even if they must do so themselves. Leadership qualities, including charisma, are also a bonus.

Lack of hesitation. Immediate identification and exploitations of weaknesses and advantages. A complete lack of aversion to violence, but also no particular preference for it. A willingness to suffer losses to win, but also to be willing to retreat when such losses would undermine the long term strategy or goal of the fighting.

...

No. A smart brute who watches where he steps.

When you are strong enough to take on the small army by yourself you can indulge in such things as thinking. Because you have time and a lot of opportunities to do so. And you will need it to win the war.

Every warrior fights his own personal war. Sometimes it is simple and could be easily seen - like that country attacks this country and there is a lot of dead people. And you could choose where to put your support and decide the result of the conflict. But that's just the shallows.

When you are so strong things a lot of times take a turn from simple physical confrontations to more prolonged and abstract campaigns where you may battle not against other men (or whoever else lives in your world) but say against injustice in general or for a vision of a certain future that you want to make reality.

On the surface it may seem that the blade and armor are what defines the warrior but you need to know his goals to measure him fully. For some winning against an army is all they want in life and for others it is just a small step on the way to their endgame.

Do what is necessary without needlessly compromising themselves, it should be clarified. Ideals shouldn't falter in the face of overwhelming odds.