Because, due to their lower AC and higher speed, they should be manually controlled, like a Kensai or backstabbing thief, where as the berserker, you just enrage (if needed) and throw him at the enemies with an attack closest enemy script since he's fairly save due to high AC...unfortunately, it also makes him boring to play.
It'd be a different story if all the combat options were available (like ToEE made available, which also existed in 2nd edition), but playing a high AC character with no other perks or real abilities...can't do it. That extra level of care needed to use them effectively is what adds interest in playing them.
True....but ToB is mercifully short, and unlike the berserker who never changes (unless you dual-class), you spend most of the game with a more interesting character, and even then, as mentioned several times, you're basically a B/C (self-buffs only) as a single class when playing a Barb.
Fighters would be a lot more interesting if they added charging (trades +2 (bad) AC for +2 hit, and double damage with spears, for 1 round), bull-rushing (str check to avoid being knockback or down), grappling (str checks, target is basically held if failed till next round), tripping (dex check, knocks down), disarming (dex check, reduced thac0 and damage, certain enemies only) as combat options. Zip in with a speedy character and grapple a mage or archer to stop them from attacking, or bull-rush or trip a melee character and then everyone basically jump him while he's down.
Technically any time you cross ANY beholder, it's supposed to be game over, immediately, unless the DM deliberately gimps them and makes them do stupid stuff. Beholder's exist to kill characters no matter how powerful they are (they are the Someone stronger, in always someone stronger) and if you do manage to kill one, you got lucky, since they have ALL the advantages. BG is basically a satire by making you go to a city of beholders and also fight them in huge groups when they appear in other places, despite being HIGHLY solitary creatures due to their massive egos.
After a point I just stop caring. The berserker and barbarian's rage have too many immunities, so I don't play as either of them, but if I had to choose, I'd play the barbarian, since it's a far more interesting character, as opposed to a berserker who you just throw at stuff and forget he exists while you play a caster or thief for the rest of the battle.
From where you take that dude? In BG2, we're pratically near epic levels, a moment when we only fail saving throws in critical miss (1 on the roll). Besides, we're not only powerful enough, we have tons of magical items (even if we do not have the shield of balduran we have a lot of others), and mainly by the fact every group beholder fight, we had a chance to prepare and pre-buff before.
I don't see why Beholders should make a game over when we're able to kill ancient dragons lichs and demi-lichs at all.
I know I'm a bit of a turd for saying this, but I haven't read this thread because I've read so many like it. So let me just say this for the barb without knowing if it has already been said:
Barbs are amazing. In later levels AC means absolutely nothing so not being able to wear plate isn't a weakness. Their damage resistance is legendary. The extra hit points are very handy. The bonus movement speed is a blast. They are NOT weakened after their rage.
The only two things that matter to me that the berserker has and the barb doesn't is grandmastery in a weapon (overrated), and the ability to dual class.
However you are simply comparing the two CLASSES, not their dual classing ability. If that is the case the obviously the berserker would win because you CAN dual class him.
As a single class, Barbs are just too awesome. Love em.
@ZanathKariashi Be careful when comparing BG to PnP; things work quite differently. It's understandable that PnP is a lot stricter, and more restrained in terms of power. BG is a video game after all, and people that play those don't necessarily have any experience with (or interest in) PnP. When talking about these issue, always keep that gap in mind. Sometimes the comparison makes sense, but sometimes (as in this case) you just have to look at BG as a bit of a more isolated world.
And since you're intended to face-roll everything, by design apparently, I stop caring. If I have to mod it to make it challenging, it's a failing of the game itself. BG's story is good, it's implementation is NOT.
Home field advantage, and tactics, also....that is just regular beholders...Mother and Elder Orbs combine that with 20+ level mage spellcasting. Melee is useless against beholder's...they're lairs are specifically designed to allow them to stay out of melee range, and their main eye not only removes all your buffs, it turns all your equipment non-magical for as long as you remain in the field (Only Artifact quality items aren't suppressed (and technically speaking only the staff of the magi (even though it's weaker then the PnP version), robe of Vecna, deck of many things, Crom Faeyr (even though it's weaker then the PnP version), and possibly the fully restored flail of ages, would be considered artifacts in BG).
While they can't use their beams to fire directly into the field, they can use their telekinesis beams to hurl projectiles at any archers they can spot (since normal ranged weapons are their only weakness...and are MUCH weaker in DnD since they can't benefit from extra attacks, unless they're the archer kit), or swivel their body so they can bring their other beams to bear. Or hell, just use their disintegration beams to cut a hole in the room's ceiling to crush them, and while blasting any of the heroes who manage to dodge out of the way.
They also tend to keep several thralled (via their domination beams) minions around to tell them how awesome they are, and to throw at enemies.
Dragons are positively helpless by comparison, The smarter ones will just fly away and attack you in ambush later when you least expect it, since most dragons have some level of mage casting ability and are physically very powerful, but unlike a beholder that can attack...potentially up to 14 times per round depending on how spread out the party is) a dragon can either melee for 3 attacks per round (6 under haste), use it's breath weapon (which takes several rounds to recharge) or cast a spell.
And REAL demi-liches would absolutely destroy the party (even in modules you require a deus ex machina from the DM to kill them, since straight up combat is pointless and suicidal). Just imagine fighting Kangaxx with no protections at all (since the abilities commonly used to counter them don't exist in PnP or work completely differently then in BG), and he full heals every time he captures a soul (at -10 save, by the way, and requires the target to have 18 or more HD to get a save AT ALL). Except he also has the spellcasting ability of a level 30 wizard (the maximum level of any class in PnP) including Epic spells, and are so powerful they can flat-out resist the effects of an anti-magic field, have 95% spell resistance, require weapons with the vorpal property to deal more then 1 damage per hit, immunity to 8th and lower spells, (with regard to self-targeting abilities and effects) and get a save to ignore the effects of a time-stop.
About Demi-lichs i have to evaluate better, i really have no idea of what a demi-lich is outside baldur's gate, but about the beholders, your arguments fall to nearly every other race of underdark. Drows can flight inside underdark, they crossbows give a 100% psn sleep chance when hit, mind flayers aren't supposed to be resistible when they join their force with the backup of an elder brain... among other questions.
However, what make a good game is opportunity, the main flaw in BG was the lack of a crisis to justify the party to enter the beholder lair, they're inteligent creatures, they can speak (or send thougths in other people head at least), but we just enter their lair, destroy everything and get out.
In the Illithid lair, we got the help of a party of githyankis to disrupt the mind flayer's elder brain power, in the drow city we got Adalon illusion spell, but in the beholder city... nothing, just go there and slaughter everything with no sub-plot (the same with the Shauagin). I don't see invading a beholder lair as impossible, just do not have a reason at all to motivate the player (we got the elder orb eye in the entrance of the beholder lair anyway, so why bother in explore the entire place? That's clearly lack of content.
In PnP terms we could be more stealthy, we could use the environment against the beholders, we could take an entire month to infiltrate and make the kills, we could hire thugs or enforcements (or cannon fodder) to participate in the fight (specially if we're working for the 1° house of Ush'Natha, that should provide 1 or 2 thousands of kobold slaves easly for a so important task). But as you already know, the plataform can't reproduce everything the PnP do.
Obs: In drizzt's novels, in the exile book, drizzt pratically destroyed an entire Illithid city, in reason of peculiar circunstances, and circunstances like those that make the history fun and interesting (same in BG).
@smeagolheart, i was playing with Korgan a while ago and he send a message for you:
This thread is about single class vs single class, so dualing is irrelevant.
I thought the thread was about: Barbarian vs Berserker: which is better?
not Barbarian vs Berserker: which is better if you don't use your berserker properly
Then you didn't read the OP and you're just running your mouth.
So what? the discussion is labeled on the title, the OP can give the first shape of the discussion but evidently on the limit of the good sense.
If we follow what you believe blindly, lemme make then an fighter x wizard thread. Who is better? But just to set some rules, Thac0, HP, APR and AC cannot be used as arguments. So... ring any bells now?
That's a bit different (one ability that's restricted to only a single race out of 6 races, all of which can be both berserkers and barbarians, but only 1 of which can dual-class).........though technically..still the fighter, they have better gear access negating most of the benefit from spells (most of which are passive or useable as active abilities) and don't rely on resting frequently to murder everything thing, due to the superior base damage of their available weapons.
Home field advantage, and tactics, also....that is just regular beholders...Mother and Elder Orbs combine that with 20+ level mage spellcasting. Melee is useless against beholder's...they're lairs are specifically designed to allow them to stay out of melee range, and their main eye not only removes all your buffs, it turns all your equipment non-magical for as long as you remain in the field (Only Artifact quality items aren't suppressed (and technically speaking only the staff of the magi (even though it's weaker then the PnP version), robe of Vecna, deck of many things, Crom Faeyr (even though it's weaker then the PnP version), and possibly the fully restored flail of ages, would be considered artifacts in BG).
While they can't use their beams to fire directly into the field, they can use their telekinesis beams to hurl projectiles at any archers they can spot (since normal ranged weapons are their only weakness...and are MUCH weaker in DnD since they can't benefit from extra attacks, unless they're the archer kit), or swivel their body so they can bring their other beams to bear. Or hell, just use their disintegration beams to cut a hole in the room's ceiling to crush them, and while blasting any of the heroes who manage to dodge out of the way.
Beholders aren't nearly as powerful as you make them out to be. Unless they get lucky and a 20th level fighter fails his saving throw against the instant kills, the beholder is toast. Beholders simply don't have that many hitpoints and can only use a maximum of 3-4 eyestalks on a single target/round.
A 20th level fighter with, say, 19 strength is going to be doing 10+ damage/round with a non-magic bow (at high level he can certainly afford a bow which can utilise his strength bonus). He has 3 attacks/round (assuming no bow specialisation). His THACO of 0 is going to have no trouble hitting individual eye stalks so by the end of the first round he can take out the death ray, petrification and disintegrate eyestalks.
After that there's simply nothing the beholder can do to put any serious hurt on the fighter before it's all over.
And that's before using any high level abilities. Factor those in (e.g. whirlwind attack) and the beholder would be obliterated within a round. Or if the beholder isn't using his anti-magic beam then the damage it takes will be a lot higher.
This thread is about single class vs single class, so dualing is irrelevant.
I thought the thread was about: Barbarian vs Berserker: which is better?
not Barbarian vs Berserker: which is better if you don't use your berserker properly
Then you didn't read the OP and you're just running your mouth.
So what? the discussion is labeled on the title, the OP can give the first shape of the discussion but evidently on the limit of the good sense.
If we follow what you believe blindly, lemme make then an fighter x wizard thread. Who is better? But just to set some rules, Thac0, HP, APR and AC cannot be used as arguments. So... ring any bells now?
If you want to make that thread, please do. There's room on the internet and no harm done. No, I don't see your point.
@FinneousPJ I think most people would consider the ability to dual class as a significant difference between barbarian and berserker. One that affects the "which is better" debate.
If you want to find the people that agree with your assumptions for one specific playthough that you are planning as a demihuman that's cool. It should not be called "barbarian vs. berserker which is better" because you will be misleading people as @kamuizin said. Some people new to the game may be searching these forums to find out "barbarian vs. berserker which is better" and come across your poll and think it means something but in fact you only mean it applies to your one playthrough so the poll is not representing the big picture.
There is no need to make yet another "barbarian vs. berserker which is better" thread, there should be room in this one. Instead of being a bully to people who don't agree with you, I'd suggest renaming the thread "barbarian vs. berserker which is better for my next playthrough as a half-orc" or allowing people their opinions to answer the question.
"Consider no cheats, no mods, and both are single classed.
Which class is more powerful?"
Just to play with the words.
That doesn't meant that we can't base our opinions in dual class, that only meant that we have to do the comparison BEFORE a dual class, so raise dual class as an advantage is not an issue. If dual-class was a forbidden issue, that should be stated as "Consider no cheats, no mods and no dual-class.
No. Obviously, for there to be a meaningful conversation, there must first be established a common framework. This is done in the OP. You are the one being a "bully" (or at least inconsiderate of others), coming here, ignoring the common framework and instead loud mouthing your own opinion regardless. If the OP wants to know what's best for a non-dual classed run, why do you insist on mentioning dual classing at every turn?
Actually, the ability to dual-class is just a foot-note. A HUMAN berserker can dual-class....and only a human berserker. 1 of 6 races that can be both berserkers and barbarians.....what if the OP doesn't like humans or prefers other racial benefits? The ability to dual-class doesn't exist then.
To those who say barbarians arent good because of str mod items.. just think about it: you can shoot the bigger strenght increasing items to other characters. 21 STR is all a barbarian needs to reach 25str when raged.
Also, it's end game stuff, but white dragon scale can be used by a barbarian right? That's as good as plate i believe. Worst to come, use a shield. I was surprised when i finished my last BG2 game when Korgan kicked sarevok's ass in terms of kills when he was using a shield and sarevok used a 2h (Ravager+6 by the end), but I had to back up sarevok so much since he was getting hit more... korgan with a shield allowed him to stay up front in the battle more because of his -13 AC vs Sarevok's -6/7AC
"Consider no cheats, no mods, and both are single classed.
Given that neither class can be part of a multiclass, I'd interpreted the OP as meaning we shouldn't consider dual-classing.
However I can see how you could have interpreted it differently.
Seriously, what idiot interprets "both are single classed" to mean dual classing is an option?
People that didn't go to school in america perhaps? Like people that speak more than one language. People that interpret "both are single classed" differently than you do?
I've asked @Jalily to take a look at this thread because you and FinneousPJ are using personal attacks when the rest of us are trying to express opinions about "Barbarian vs Berserker: which is better?"
"Consider no cheats, no mods, and both are single classed.
Given that neither class can be part of a multiclass, I'd interpreted the OP as meaning we shouldn't consider dual-classing.
However I can see how you could have interpreted it differently.
Seriously, what idiot interprets "both are single classed" to mean dual classing is an option?
People that didn't go to school in america perhaps? Like people that speak more than one language. People that interpret "both are single classed" differently than you do?
I've asked @Jalily to take a look at this thread because you and FinneousPJ are using personal attacks when the rest of us are trying to express opinions about "Barbarian vs Berserker: which is better?"
"Personal" attacks?
No, I was making an observation and stating my opinion, while at the same time defending my correct use of the English language.
If that offends anybody who is using English on this message board, but English is not their primary language, please accept my sincerest apologies. My intent was not to offend.
My intent was to offend anybody who feels the people who decide to post here without even reading the first post.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around how you can interpret my attack as "personal" (just using your words).
"Consider no cheats, no mods, and both are single classed.
Given that neither class can be part of a multiclass, I'd interpreted the OP as meaning we shouldn't consider dual-classing.
However I can see how you could have interpreted it differently.
Seriously, what idiot interprets "both are single classed" to mean dual classing is an option?
I hope english to not be your home language dude, cos this will be shameful otherwise. English is my 2° language and even then...
-If the phrase stated:
"both are single class" it would be in the continuous present, so at this moment they're Berserker and Barbarian. In this scenario dual class is possible.
-The phrase was stated as:
"both are single classed" In fact classed do not even exist apparently, not for what we're using the word. Class in this phrase would be an adjective, you do not flex an adjective, there's no thing as beautfied or stronged or... you got the idea.
Classed would be at maximun an direct object in this scenario.
But the main question is that "are" is an passive verb! How can you expel a comand with an passive verb?
-The better way to phrase to keep dual class out of the discussion (with intent at least, cos i would solemnly ignore the OP this way):
"both have to be single class" OR "both must be single class"
. . .
So, i would like now to ask what kind of idiot take a passive verb for command, but that can be a bit offensive !
Edit: it's my impression or the agressive, uncultured and uncivilized people that appear in this thread are barbarian voters? Not that all barbarian voters have those "qualities"... so i see, Sendai was right in the Cloudpeak mountains!
Okay, that was fun. But let's see if we can try this discussion again without resorting to insults and ad hominem arguments. Feel free to create a new thread with a less adversarial tone.
Comments
It'd be a different story if all the combat options were available (like ToEE made available, which also existed in 2nd edition), but playing a high AC character with no other perks or real abilities...can't do it. That extra level of care needed to use them effectively is what adds interest in playing them.
but yes agree about backstabbing thiefs
this is more reasonable explanation than previous post but still barb in tob levels would tank much more than berserker so roles reversed
Fighters would be a lot more interesting if they added charging (trades +2 (bad) AC for +2 hit, and double damage with spears, for 1 round), bull-rushing (str check to avoid being knockback or down), grappling (str checks, target is basically held if failed till next round), tripping (dex check, knocks down), disarming (dex check, reduced thac0 and damage, certain enemies only) as combat options. Zip in with a speedy character and grapple a mage or archer to stop them from attacking, or bull-rush or trip a melee character and then everyone basically jump him while he's down.
I don't see why Beholders should make a game over when we're able to kill ancient dragons lichs and demi-lichs at all.
Barbs are amazing. In later levels AC means absolutely nothing so not being able to wear plate isn't a weakness. Their damage resistance is legendary. The extra hit points are very handy. The bonus movement speed is a blast. They are NOT weakened after their rage.
The only two things that matter to me that the berserker has and the barb doesn't is grandmastery in a weapon (overrated), and the ability to dual class.
However you are simply comparing the two CLASSES, not their dual classing ability. If that is the case the obviously the berserker would win because you CAN dual class him.
As a single class, Barbs are just too awesome. Love em.
@kamuizin
Home field advantage, and tactics, also....that is just regular beholders...Mother and Elder Orbs combine that with 20+ level mage spellcasting. Melee is useless against beholder's...they're lairs are specifically designed to allow them to stay out of melee range, and their main eye not only removes all your buffs, it turns all your equipment non-magical for as long as you remain in the field (Only Artifact quality items aren't suppressed (and technically speaking only the staff of the magi (even though it's weaker then the PnP version), robe of Vecna, deck of many things, Crom Faeyr (even though it's weaker then the PnP version), and possibly the fully restored flail of ages, would be considered artifacts in BG).
While they can't use their beams to fire directly into the field, they can use their telekinesis beams to hurl projectiles at any archers they can spot (since normal ranged weapons are their only weakness...and are MUCH weaker in DnD since they can't benefit from extra attacks, unless they're the archer kit), or swivel their body so they can bring their other beams to bear. Or hell, just use their disintegration beams to cut a hole in the room's ceiling to crush them, and while blasting any of the heroes who manage to dodge out of the way.
They also tend to keep several thralled (via their domination beams) minions around to tell them how awesome they are, and to throw at enemies.
Dragons are positively helpless by comparison, The smarter ones will just fly away and attack you in ambush later when you least expect it, since most dragons have some level of mage casting ability and are physically very powerful, but unlike a beholder that can attack...potentially up to 14 times per round depending on how spread out the party is) a dragon can either melee for 3 attacks per round (6 under haste), use it's breath weapon (which takes several rounds to recharge) or cast a spell.
And REAL demi-liches would absolutely destroy the party (even in modules you require a deus ex machina from the DM to kill them, since straight up combat is pointless and suicidal). Just imagine fighting Kangaxx with no protections at all (since the abilities commonly used to counter them don't exist in PnP or work completely differently then in BG), and he full heals every time he captures a soul (at -10 save, by the way, and requires the target to have 18 or more HD to get a save AT ALL). Except he also has the spellcasting ability of a level 30 wizard (the maximum level of any class in PnP) including Epic spells, and are so powerful they can flat-out resist the effects of an anti-magic field, have 95% spell resistance, require weapons with the vorpal property to deal more then 1 damage per hit, immunity to 8th and lower spells, (with regard to self-targeting abilities and effects) and get a save to ignore the effects of a time-stop.
not Barbarian vs Berserker: which is better if you don't use your berserker properly
About Demi-lichs i have to evaluate better, i really have no idea of what a demi-lich is outside baldur's gate, but about the beholders, your arguments fall to nearly every other race of underdark. Drows can flight inside underdark, they crossbows give a 100% psn sleep chance when hit, mind flayers aren't supposed to be resistible when they join their force with the backup of an elder brain... among other questions.
However, what make a good game is opportunity, the main flaw in BG was the lack of a crisis to justify the party to enter the beholder lair, they're inteligent creatures, they can speak (or send thougths in other people head at least), but we just enter their lair, destroy everything and get out.
In the Illithid lair, we got the help of a party of githyankis to disrupt the mind flayer's elder brain power, in the drow city we got Adalon illusion spell, but in the beholder city... nothing, just go there and slaughter everything with no sub-plot (the same with the Shauagin). I don't see invading a beholder lair as impossible, just do not have a reason at all to motivate the player (we got the elder orb eye in the entrance of the beholder lair anyway, so why bother in explore the entire place? That's clearly lack of content.
In PnP terms we could be more stealthy, we could use the environment against the beholders, we could take an entire month to infiltrate and make the kills, we could hire thugs or enforcements (or cannon fodder) to participate in the fight (specially if we're working for the 1° house of Ush'Natha, that should provide 1 or 2 thousands of kobold slaves easly for a so important task). But as you already know, the plataform can't reproduce everything the PnP do.
Obs: In drizzt's novels, in the exile book, drizzt pratically destroyed an entire Illithid city, in reason of peculiar circunstances, and circunstances like those that make the history fun and interesting (same in BG).
@smeagolheart, i was playing with Korgan a while ago and he send a message for you:
If we follow what you believe blindly, lemme make then an fighter x wizard thread. Who is better? But just to set some rules, Thac0, HP, APR and AC cannot be used as arguments. So... ring any bells now?
A 20th level fighter with, say, 19 strength is going to be doing 10+ damage/round with a non-magic bow (at high level he can certainly afford a bow which can utilise his strength bonus). He has 3 attacks/round (assuming no bow specialisation). His THACO of 0 is going to have no trouble hitting individual eye stalks so by the end of the first round he can take out the death ray, petrification and disintegrate eyestalks.
After that there's simply nothing the beholder can do to put any serious hurt on the fighter before it's all over.
And that's before using any high level abilities. Factor those in (e.g. whirlwind attack) and the beholder would be obliterated within a round. Or if the beholder isn't using his anti-magic beam then the damage it takes will be a lot higher.
If you want to find the people that agree with your assumptions for one specific playthough that you are planning as a demihuman that's cool. It should not be called "barbarian vs. berserker which is better" because you will be misleading people as @kamuizin said. Some people new to the game may be searching these forums to find out "barbarian vs. berserker which is better" and come across your poll and think it means something but in fact you only mean it applies to your one playthrough so the poll is not representing the big picture.
There is no need to make yet another "barbarian vs. berserker which is better" thread, there should be room in this one. Instead of being a bully to people who don't agree with you, I'd suggest renaming the thread "barbarian vs. berserker which is better for my next playthrough as a half-orc" or allowing people their opinions to answer the question.
"Consider no cheats, no mods, and both are single classed.
Which class is more powerful?"
Just to play with the words.
That doesn't meant that we can't base our opinions in dual class, that only meant that we have to do the comparison BEFORE a dual class, so raise dual class as an advantage is not an issue. If dual-class was a forbidden issue, that should be stated as "Consider no cheats, no mods and no dual-class.
However I can see how you could have interpreted it differently.
No. Obviously, for there to be a meaningful conversation, there must first be established a common framework. This is done in the OP. You are the one being a "bully" (or at least inconsiderate of others), coming here, ignoring the common framework and instead loud mouthing your own opinion regardless. If the OP wants to know what's best for a non-dual classed run, why do you insist on mentioning dual classing at every turn?
Sorry dude, but with this behavior you're asking to be trolled: A forum is a place to think, i will not abide of my ideas to follow unjustified rules.
Also, it's end game stuff, but white dragon scale can be used by a barbarian right? That's as good as plate i believe. Worst to come, use a shield. I was surprised when i finished my last BG2 game when Korgan kicked sarevok's ass in terms of kills when he was using a shield and sarevok used a 2h (Ravager+6 by the end), but I had to back up sarevok so much since he was getting hit more... korgan with a shield allowed him to stay up front in the battle more because of his -13 AC vs Sarevok's -6/7AC
I've asked @Jalily to take a look at this thread because you and FinneousPJ are using personal attacks when the rest of us are trying to express opinions about "Barbarian vs Berserker: which is better?"
No, I was making an observation and stating my opinion, while at the same time defending my correct use of the English language.
If that offends anybody who is using English on this message board, but English is not their primary language, please accept my sincerest apologies. My intent was not to offend.
My intent was to offend anybody who feels the people who decide to post here without even reading the first post.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around how you can interpret my attack as "personal" (just using your words).
(Now THAT'S an example of a personal attack)
-If the phrase stated:
"both are single class" it would be in the continuous present, so at this moment they're Berserker and Barbarian. In this scenario dual class is possible.
-The phrase was stated as:
"both are single classed" In fact classed do not even exist apparently, not for what we're using the word.
Class in this phrase would be an adjective, you do not flex an adjective, there's no thing as beautfied or stronged or... you got the idea.
Classed would be at maximun an direct object in this scenario.
But the main question is that "are" is an passive verb! How can you expel a comand with an passive verb?
-The better way to phrase to keep dual class out of the discussion (with intent at least, cos i would solemnly ignore the OP this way):
"both have to be single class" OR "both must be single class"
.
.
.
So, i would like now to ask what kind of idiot take a passive verb for command, but that can be a bit offensive
Edit: it's my impression or the agressive, uncultured and uncivilized people that appear in this thread are barbarian voters? Not that all barbarian voters have those "qualities"... so i see, Sendai was right in the Cloudpeak mountains!
Thread closed.