Beating a dead horse with TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING.

[Mr_Ed7]

Ok, I get it fighting with two-weapons you do alot of damage, but does that mean every melee I build should do so?

I think there are enough two-weapon blenders outthere don't ya, so some of us can go back to using shields and shooting bows?

[Mhykke]

I think there are enough two-weapon blenders outthere don't ya, so some of us can go back to using shields and shooting bows?

No.

[VKhaun]

Ok, I get it fighting with two-weapons you do alot of damage, but does that mean every melee I build should do so?

I think there are enough two-weapon blenders outthere don't ya, so some of us can go back to using shields and shooting bows?


Shields, not just 'all blocking' but it says specifically SHIELDS, will be made more responsive in mod9, and glancing damage will have that DR really matter. Depending on how skillful you are, shields might have a role against enemies throwing out lots of glances and special moves and the like. Might. I hope so. I really like the style of a shield user in DDO personally.

Bows will probably always be laughable. :P

[Minor_Threat]

why do you keep starting new threads to post small comments?

why don't you gather your thoughts and post them in one coherent post.

ps... cool story bro.


Ok, I get it fighting with two-weapons you do alot of damage, but does that mean every melee I build should do so?

I think there are enough two-weapon blenders outthere don't ya, so some of us can go back to using shields and shooting bows?

People can use whatever weapons they want, many choose TWF because it is very nice DPS. Who are you trying to criticize? No one is forcing you to do anything.

[Valezra]

Play whatever you like man. But don't post any S&B build on the forums that isn't a tank and expect the majority of people to give positive or useful feedback.

Want to make a S&B Intimitank? Plenty of help from the community.

Want to make a S&B Cleric? Plenty of help from the community.

Want to make a S&B no-intimidate healing Paladin? Expect jokes and "/reroll" replies.

Like I said before... if you want help making a very good Pure Pally build we would be glad to help.

Val

[Mr_Ed7]

why do you keep starting new threads to post small comments?

why don't you gather your thoughts and post them in one coherent post.

ps... cool story bro.



People can use whatever weapons they want, many choose TWF because it is very nice DPS. Who are you trying to criticize? No one is forcing you to do anything.

What small comments? That seems subjective to me.

Apparently got your attention though, probably best to ignore the small comments, eh?

However I had to address that once again it has been suggested to me to make my character a two-weapon fighter.

Three different styles of builds, all should be two-weapon fighters...?
Strange that people should always go there.

It is as though, what you like, what may be part of a character background is just tossed aside for the stacking of numbers.

I like the TWF, I have it on ONE of my guys, but not all of them...

[Mr_Ed7]

Play whatever you like man. But don't post any S&B build on the forums that isn't a tank and expect the majority of people to give positive or useful feedback.

Want to make a S&B Intimitank? Plenty of help from the community.

Want to make a S&B Cleric? Plenty of help from the community.

Want to make a S&B no-intimidate healing Paladin? Expect jokes and "/reroll" replies.

Like I said before... if you want help making a very good Pure Pally build we would be glad to help.

Val

Will not there be any other intimatanks out-there? There should be, I already have 2! Got an s&b cleric.

I never asked for your kudos..
I was not POSTING A BUILD, for one I don't do BUILDS.

I got a guy that does all these useful things, you don't like him don't play with em.

AND On the same note Don't get all cat****y with me because I don't listen to the same rock and roll as you do.

[Minor_Threat]

I bet people ask you, "Huh?" a lot.

might want to figure that out.

Seemed like Val was being straight with you, why the attitude?

[Mr_Ed7]

I bet people ask you, "Huh?" a lot.

might want to figure that out.

Seemed like Val was being straight with you, why the attitude?

HUH?

No attitude on this end...

[valorik]

whoops wrong thread :o

[Minor_Threat]

HUH?

No attitude on this end...

http://www.pokeyprasch.com/images/ddcartoon_huh.jpg

[toughguyjoe]

I personally enjoy THF over TWF< but i agree that i am losing DPS, its just more my style. However, I have a S&B healing paladin! Hes a hlfling named Uuncle. No joke. Hes capped and is specced for LoH, Healing with halfling marks. I played him for some time and ran him through shroud and everything.

Hes a bank slot now. It just didn't work FOR ME. I made his AC as high as i could get it and it became respectable, but i had no intimidate as he was my first Pally. His DPS IS SO LOW.

HOW LOW IS IT?

Its so Low It took me more than twenty seconds to kill a pillar in titan that was at ten percent.

You don't want to know How long it took me to prep the pillars, and that was with help.


So i'll probably delete him and make a Human Paladin with a greataxe that fights THF and has correct skills and such to make him a cohesive part of an end game raiding party.

Who knows. Right now hes carrying some cool stuff. But hey, Make whatever you want Ed. I'm sure I won't see you except in passing anyway.

[toughguyjoe]

No.


(Standard): You must spread some reputation around before giving it to Mhykke again.

[Mhykke]

But hey, Make whatever you want Ed. I'm sure I won't see you except in passing anyway.

See what he did there?

[sigtrent]

Ok, I get it fighting with two-weapons you do alot of damage, but does that mean every melee I build should do so?

I think there are enough two-weapon blenders outthere don't ya, so some of us can go back to using shields and shooting bows?

You can build characters for lots of reasons.

1. You want to maximize some kind of game rule
2. You want to look cool
3. You want to simulate some famous or personally vested previous character.
4. You are trying to be effective but take an unpopular or novel strategy.
5. You are experimenting with the rules
Etc...

If you are making a DPS machine... well its hard to go wrong with TWF at the moment.

THF is decent and can work great on the right character as well but its currently more specialized.

Sword and board is not meant to be the DPS king, its a defensive strategy. Want a "balanced" character? Thats good too but its unlikely to impress anyone.

My main is not a TWF specialist or a THF specialist or a Sword and Board specialist. He just uses whichever technique is most effective at the time. When playing DPS I go with TWF 85% of the time, and THF about 15%. I use a sword and shield when I pull more agro than I can handle or when I intentionally want to tank rather than kill stuff, or when I'm running around getting pelted by arrows and such. I pull out a bow when a bow is useful, which is say around 10% of the time in most quests.

The thing is, you can't really build for sword and shield use in a meaningful way. You can make a tank, but only a small part of that build is about the shield. You can specialize in bow, but its not that rewarding as it isn't a really strong DPS technique except in certain situations. TWF and THF are definately things you can build into your character. It doesn't mean you have to always use Two weapons or a two handed weapon, but when you do want to do DPS, you will have a very strong profile for doing so.

[Leyoni]

Ok, I get it fighting with two-weapons you do alot of damage, but does that mean every melee I build should do so?

I think there are enough two-weapon blenders outthere don't ya, so some of us can go back to using shields and shooting bows?

Even though my signature features Leyoni, most of my builds are warrior types -- rangers, fighters or barbarians.

If a ranger then TWF.

If a fighter then TWF.

If a barbarian then TWF or THF.

In all cases, if there are enough feats, do both.

Why? Because THF does more damage when there are lots of mobs around you. Glancing blows really are useful. But, TWF is the choice for single enemies or end fights. Then again, I also carry around a bow on most of the characters for those rare ranged moments. And, most also have a shield for when AC & DR really matters -- particularly blocking DR.

[Valezra]

I bet people ask you, "Huh?" a lot.

might want to figure that out.

Seemed like Val was being straight with you, why the attitude?

I was wondering the same thing. Getting tired of being nice to someone who is not listening to reason.

Val

[Valezra]

I never asked for your kudos..
I was not POSTING A BUILD, for one I don't do BUILDS.


Let me help jog your memory. http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=190155

Val

[Mr_Ed7]

Even though my signature features Leyoni, most of my builds are warrior types -- rangers, fighters or barbarians.

If a ranger then TWF.

If a fighter then TWF.

If a barbarian then TWF or THF.

In all cases, if there are enough feats, do both.

Why? Because THF does more damage when there are lots of mobs around you. Glancing blows really are useful. But, TWF is the choice for single enemies or end fights. Then again, I also carry around a bow on most of the characters for those rare ranged moments. And, most also have a shield for when AC & DR really matters -- particularly blocking DR.


That's GREAT! Great for you, really its cool.

If I to build a crack-team of killers then maybe I shoud do just 10 charaters of TWF...

[Valezra]

That's GREAT! Great for you, really its cool.

If I to build a crack-team of killers then maybe I shoud do just 10 charaters of TWF...

Finally! You're talking some sense. It's really nice to see you coming around bud.

Val

[Mr_Ed7]

Finally! You're talking some sense. It's really nice to see you coming around bud.

Val

If I need cookie-cutter killers.

[HeavenlyCloud]

Depends on the situation. If you need to shield block or you need a shield for AC go S&B. If the enemy doesn't attack back go TWF or THF...

[Leyoni]

That's GREAT! Great for you, really its cool.

If I to build a crack-team of killers then maybe I shoud do just 10 charaters of TWF...

Yeah, or you could build gimps. Your choice really.

I figure most people have one or two character types that they enjoy the most. For me it is simple, straight forward, hack and slash, mindless violence. Always has been.

I run 4 accounts. Two are new, just started them for my kids. The other two are mine. I run clerics, rogues, sorcerers, wizards -- but mostly I run warriors.

And, I almost always PUG. In fact, the kids accounts are so that the two of them can group with me (they are 10 & 12 and I won't let them play unsupervised). That and the static WF group I'm in on Wednesdays are the only non-PUG play I do.

To PUG you have to be at least not horrible. That means doing decent DPS with warrior type characters. And that means having a cadre of killers. :D

Unfortunately, I do like you and a few others have done. I sometimes think I'm smarter than everyone so that I can ignore the advice on the forums, etc. As a result I sit on capped characters that will only become almost decent if DDO:EU is ever live. :o

Unlike some others, I've learned from those mistakes and now follow some pretty basic guidelines. I'll repeat them for you:

If a ranger then TWF.

If a fighter then TWF.

If a barbarian then TWF or THF.

In all cases, if there are enough feats, do both. :)

[Valezra]

Again, build to an Archetype; once you have done that branch out into whatever you want. That doesn't mean making a cookie-cutter build. It means being useful first and creative second.

I have an Intimitank that can also UMD Heal Scrolls, Raise dead and has evasion. But first, she is an intimitank.

I have a Battle Cleric with all the healing enhancements, 18% crit range on healing, 1300 SP, and does above average damage with 30 Strength and GTWF. But first, he is a healer.

Those are just examples of two characters I have made that are not "Cookie-Cutter" builds. My Battle Cleric may seem like one but I have yet to see one built the way I did it. They meet an Archetype role first before branching off into something clever.

S&B Paladins that can't intimidate are just horrible. Don't blame us for telling you that... blame Turbine for making them that way.

Val

[Mr_Ed7]

Again, build to an Archetype; once you have done that branch out into whatever you want. That doesn't mean making a cookie-cutter build. It means being useful first and creative second.

I have an Intimitank that can also UMD Heal Scrolls, Raise dead and has evasion. But first, she is an intimitank.

I have a Battle Cleric with all the healing enhancements, 18% crit range on healing, 1300 SP, and does above average damage with 30 Strength and GTWF. But first, he is a healer.

Those are just examples of two characters I have made that are not "Cookie-Cutter" builds. My Battle Cleric may seem like one but I have yet to see one built the way I did it. They meet an Archetype role first before branching off into something clever.

S&B Paladins that can't intimidate are just horrible. Don't blame us for telling you that... blame Turbine for making them that way.

Val

There is a good chance that whatever party I am in will have at least 2 other melees. Good chance one is an intimitank, and/or be able to DPS.

[drsmooth]

Beating a dead horse. <---- Is much quicker if one is TWF :)

[bandyman1]

There is a good chance that whatever party I am in will have at least 2 other melees. Good chance one is an intimitank, and/or be able to DPS.

So because the party is likely to contain two other melees that can actually contribute to the party's success, it's OK for your toon to suck???

That's what you're going with? Seriously?

[Aspenor]

There is a good chance that whatever party I am in will have at least 2 other melees. Good chance one is an intimitank, and/or be able to DPS.

As stated above, your story is that it's okay for you to not contribute because other people will?

[Kadran]

No one is saying your personal preferences are wrong. In fact, they are encouraging you to play whatever you want. What they ARE doing is advising you against this build, in case you thought it would be able to do things that it will not be able to do well.

As you can see by the slowing of responses: people have all but stopped trying to get threw to you. Probably because you are not receptive of their information. People are giving you good tips, and instead of trying to apply them to your character to make it better, you blatently ignore them and make comments like, "There's 5-11 other people to carry me threw the dungeon."

Most people who post a build on the forums do so for advice. To see if there is something they over looked. Or just to see how people will respond to a build that is outside the box. This post, as far as I can tell, was created to show us a build that is sub-optimal and to stick your fingers in your ears and scream "LA LA LA!" While we try to point out the flaws.

A lot of the people here have made a character like this before. We are trying to save you the headache of getting to level 12-16 and realizing that your character sucks. My advice with this build, since you refuse to let us help you modify it, is to use circumstantial weaponry. I.E. Destruction, Maladroit of Bone Breaking, Weakening of Enfeebling, etc.

[Aranticus]

Yeah, or you could build gimps. Your choice really.

I figure most people have one or two character types that they enjoy the most. For me it is simple, straight forward, hack and slash, mindless violence. Always has been.

I run 4 accounts. Two are new, just started them for my kids. The other two are mine. I run clerics, rogues, sorcerers, wizards -- but mostly I run warriors.

And, I almost always PUG. In fact, the kids accounts are so that the two of them can group with me (they are 10 & 12 and I won't let them play unsupervised). That and the static WF group I'm in on Wednesdays are the only non-PUG play I do.

To PUG you have to be at least not horrible. That means doing decent DPS with warrior type characters. And that means having a cadre of killers. :D

Unfortunately, I do like you and a few others have done. I sometimes think I'm smarter than everyone so that I can ignore the advice on the forums, etc. As a result I sit on capped characters that will only become almost decent if DDO:EU is ever live. :o

Unlike some others, I've learned from those mistakes and now follow some pretty basic guidelines. I'll repeat them for you:

If a ranger then TWF.

If a fighter then TWF.

If a barbarian then TWF or THF.

In all cases, if there are enough feats, do both. :)

leyoni, we have had differences before but i'm with ya on this one :)

[Aranticus]

There is a good chance that whatever party I am in will have at least 2 other melees. Good chance one is an intimitank, and/or be able to DPS.

mow i know why the OP needed to create an alliance on his server....

alliance guys, i feel for ya :)

[rezo]

Ok, I get it fighting with two-weapons you do alot of damage, but does that mean every melee I build should do so?

I think there are enough two-weapon blenders outthere don't ya, so some of us can go back to using shields and shooting bows?


I got a "Monster build(TWF)", THF build, and S&B build. Each one has good points and bad points. The "Monster" and THF have high DPS but, they got to have high hp for the lack of ac but, when I run my S&b build he takes little to no melee damage. Spells on the other hand, will make them take so damage depending on what spell I get hit with. :cool:

[Raithe]

People are giving you good tips, and instead of trying to apply them to your character to make it better, you blatently ignore them and make comments like, "There's 5-11 other people to carry me threw the dungeon."


Personally, this is not what I get from Mr. Ed's tone.

Builds don't do squat. Put a super duper TWF just inside any quest solo and then go afk. The quest will not be complete when you get back.

Put one four steps behind a monk with deadly Quivering Palm attacks or a high DC assassin, and the DPS doesn't mean squat till the end guy.

And usually, the end guy is something that is better beat with survivability and good strategy than awesome DPS.

I'm just saying... some of us are scratching our heads when people talk about a build "not contributing" to the party. For us, contribution comes in so many flavors that we'd never be able to keep track of them all.

And I'm pretty sure that DPS is the analogue of plain old vanilla.

[bandyman1]

Personally, this is not what I get from Mr. Ed's tone.

Builds don't do squat. Put a super duper TWF just inside any quest solo and then go afk. The quest will not be complete when you get back.

Put one four steps behind a monk with deadly Quivering Palm attacks or a high DC assassin, and the DPS doesn't mean squat till the end guy.

And usually, the end guy is something that is better beat with survivability and good strategy than awesome DPS.

I'm just saying... some of us are scratching our heads when people talk about a build "not contributing" to the party. For us, contribution comes in so many flavors that we'd never be able to keep track of them all.

And I'm pretty sure that DPS is the analogue of plain old vanilla.

OK Raithe, I'll bite.

Have you looked at his build on the pally forums???

What ( because several of us here are extremely interested in knowing ) exactly is he contributing ( besides soaking up a ****ton of the cleric's mana ) instead of DPS, or tankage???