Dual Class with Barbarian!!

Remove all ads!

The Tutu Tweak Pack is also a G3 mod. Though it is possible it is linked to somewhere on this site, it is not affiliated in any way with this site.

Barbarian/Thief can be a pretty powerful dual-class, yeah. Barbarian/Cleric is also pretty tough, with self-buffing spells.

 

Actually, once you take into account that a mage will have stoneskin, it becomes even LESS problematic to decide on a barbarian/mage dual class. Because you shouldn't be taking damage anyway, it eliminates the need to go to level 15 before you dual. Go to level 13, and get your barbarian skills back faster.

Arguing between 18/00 and 19 strength is a little pointless anyway. In terms of combat ability, the to hit/damage adjustment for an 18/00 is +3/+6, while 19 is +3/+7. So we're arguing semantic points more than anything.

 

^True, but according to rules a human can not have a natural 19 STR. So does Wulfgar have a little bit orcish blood? Eww I don't think so.

 

Yeah - narrative-wise we're just looking at whether superhuman ability scores would be acceptable for particularly powerful characters, which I guess they are.

The thing with the mage dual class is that if you presume you're not going to be hit, and thus don't particularly need the barbarian's additional hardiness, then there's not a great deal to distinguish a barbarian/mage from a normal fighter/mage.

 

Well Wulfgar did work in the dwarven mines for 5 years.. or was it 4! Either way it doesnt say that a Human cant have 19 strength through some exceptional training or whatnot.... then again I could be wrong since I dont really know much about 2ed rules.. or any other rules for that sake! A barbarian/cleric sounds like the best choice!!!

 

First, to all that reply back...I thank you all for the answers and background information (Conan), I did not know that I could get so much about this topic.

About the decision on when to dual my PC, I thought a first to do it at Lv. 15, but then must of you point out the fact that once I dual to mage I'll be able to cast protection spells and therefore I will not need the resistances from the barbarian. Also even if a do not count the resistances, at Lv. 13 I will get one more rage (one extra rage every four levels starting at Lv 1) to a total of four which it will be more than enough, or so I think.

Anyway, I have to remind that I will be playing from BG1-TotSC thru SoA & ToB. So maybe that can change things.

Again, thank you everyone who provided with some info to guide me.

[ January 27, 2006, 03:09: Message edited by: Maurolava ]

 

Yes level 13 sounds nice enough. Then you will need to be level 14 mage. What weapon proficiencies will you pick? Will you still use barbaric weapons like axes, greatswords etc. when you become a real arch-mage, or stick to Staff of Magi? Then you should put ** to staves and ** to twohanded weapon style. Luckily barbarians can only put ** in a weapon, so you can have one or two more different weapon types, the thought of a barbarian warrior wielding a quarterstaff in BG1 makes little sense to me.

But a cleric could be nice too, like a war-priest, or tribe shaman, with his own buffing up spells+rage could prove to be deadly, BUT it will definitely require resistances, thus a higher barb level. Your call.

 

I know axe and 2-handed swords are typical barbarian weapons, but to me, nothing says barbarian like a spear or a club.

 

Heh you may be right, spears and clubs are really primitive weapons. More primitive than a tempered sword, or axe, for instance. I don't know where I pictured axes and greatswords for barbs, maybe Diablo II barb is to blame.

 

If I recall correctly barbarians outside of roam used manufactured metal weapons they just were not as preety so to speak. Any basic styled swords (long bastard short and 2 handed), axes, maces, hammers, bows, daggers, spears and clubs would be good probably. Flails, crossbows, scimitars, katanas, and halberds would be much less aproperiate in a historicle setting though this is D&D so this does not apply as much. Assuming I am not mistaken of course.

 

Axes, Hammers, and Swords are some of the brutal unfancified weapons that the Norse used when they raided. Considered Barbarians by the big empire of the time, despite having a very intricate and sophisticated social structure.

I think this is wear the idea of Barbarians wielding two handed swords and huge axes origionates from. However the movie Genre has perpetuated the two handed or axe wielding barbarian to an art form. Conan, Kull the Conquerer, other bit parts... We've been visually indoctrinated with the idea a long time.

It helps that many of these weapons were not seen as noble weapons in the dark ages. The sword and lance being the noble weapons of that time.

But enough of the history lesson. If you want to go for spears. There are a few extremely good ones. And you'll love what Ixil's Spike can do when you get it and put it all together.

 

From my admittedly limited knowledge, axes were more popular than swords amongst European barbarians. A bearded axe is lighter and more lethal than a sword and somewhat more effective against armour. Of course every fighter knew how to use a spear or pike, they're historically the most popular melee weapon.

 

Would I be to off my head if I dual-wield axe and say...a bastard sword?
Alternatively, is it preferable two-handed weapon?

 

Preferable in terms of pure power? Yeah, probably. You can do some pretty crazy stuff with dual wield. Check the two-handed vs dual wield thread we've got going for more detailed information and some mind-numbing mathematical fluff.

 

The British Isle Celts were another tribe seen as Barbaric but they were tall like the movie barbarians and they wielded a fair ammount of swords. Granted they also ran into battle naked with their slain enemies heads tied to their belts for the fear it struck in their smaller "more civilized" foes in battle.