Beating a dead horse with TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING.

[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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

[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???