@elminster that's what I meant by 12 AC: from 10 base AC it gets you to -2 indeed.
Just use the same way the game does. I, for one, had no idea what 12 AC meant before el cleared it out. It's the only armor system ever that makes any sense. While growing numbers are nice, they usually don't make any sense in the big picture.
The DD has 18 Str at start, +1 with the Tome in BG1. +1 with MoLtM +2 with Hell Trials (+1 if you are using I don't which mod or version of the game which fix the main stat gain when killing Wraith Sarevok) +1 from the Deck
@Gotural: That's a +3 to damage in TOB. At the beginning of BG1, the difference is at least +4 to damage, assuming the DD has 18/00 STR and the barbarian has 18 as well. The difference is bigger if the DD has 18/91 or less STR. It's also +4 in the barbarian's favor if they're both at 19 STR.
So no, the STR bonus from rage is a pretty big deal, from Candlekeep to the Throne of Bhaal. The barbarian will do 3 or 4 more damage per hit than the DD when raging. Sometimes more. At no point in the entire saga is that STR bonus "wasted." Not even close.
The DD has 18 Str at start, +1 with the Tome in BG1. +1 with MoLtM +2 with Hell Trials (+1 if you are using I don't which mod or version of the game which fix the main stat gain when killing Wraith Sarevok) +1 from the Deck
=23 (24).
+4 Str won't do much.
As a barb you can give the MoLtM and deck bonus to someone else which puts you at a perfect 21 for maxing out with rage.
It's also worth noting that going from 24 to 25 strength gives +1 attack and +2 damage.
@Wowo At no point I ever thought about giving the bonuses to another character, very good idea.
Still, it doesn't make a huge difference. What does +3 damage represents in late game ? +10% damage ? It will nearly never be enough to make or break a fight. On the contrary the Defensive Stance gives about 100% more EHP which is significant.
To my mind, the true advantage of the Barbarian is definitely his speed compared to the slowed DD. This alone would make me chose the Barb in some situations over the DD.
@Gotural: 3 damage is what you get from 9 levels of Kensai. And as I said before, that's only late-TOB. For all of BG1, that's +4, or 12 levels of Kensai. It is also the difference between a +1 long sword and Celestial Fury, or a nonmagical long sword and Namarra. Tell me those don't matter.
The DD might still have a defensive advantage, but saying +3 damage doesn't matter is simply not true.
@Gotural: 3 damage is what you get from 9 levels of Kensai. And as I said before, that's only late-TOB. For all of BG1, that's +4, or 12 levels of Kensai. It is also the difference between a +1 long sword and Celestial Fury, or a nonmagical long sword and Namarra. Tell me those don't matter.
The DD might still have a defensive advantage, but saying +3 damage doesn't matter is simply not true.
This is very true. It's most helpful to work it out as a proportion of damage rather than just the number itself to put it into context.
For the most part it just keeps barbarian ahead of DD who has High Mastery in axes and hammers.
And that's why I dislike Kensai in general, because I think +1 damage per 3 levels isn't significant enough to make a difference. To each their own I guess
Something bothers me in this thread: most arguments in favor of the barb seem to think that the game starts in TOB.
But actually, the 2 classes are very different in the early game: - the barb is much stronger offensively when he is using rage and much stronger against mages but is clearly not a tank (no DR, no heavy armor) - the DD is a tank from the start of the game thanks to stance
The more the game progress, the more the differences disappear: - the barb gets better at tanking (innate DR, very good light armors and AC beginning to be useless, hardiness) - the DD closes the gap offensively (lower impact of rage, lower impact of +2-3 damage/attack) and for magical defense (saves deeply under 0)
At the end of game, both are very good tanks and very good offensively. At this stage, the barb has probably the upper end thanks to his superior running speed.
Something bothers me in this thread: most arguments in favor of the barb seem to think that the game starts in TOB.
But actually, the 2 classes are very different in the early game: - the barb is much stronger offensively when he is using rage and much stronger against mages but is clearly not a tank (no DR, no heavy armor) - the DD is a tank from the start of the game thanks to stance
The more the game progress, the more the differences disappear: - the barb gets better at tanking (innate DR, very good light armors and AC beginning to be useless, hardiness) - the DD closes the gap offensively (lower impact of rage, lower impact of +2-3 damage/attack) and for magical defense (saves deeply under 0)
At the end of game, both are very good tanks and very good offensively. At this stage, the barb has probably the upper end thanks to his superior running speed.
Barbarian makes a passable tank for the whole game due to the huge HP pool. I mean, who has more Hp than a raging dwarf barbarian?
Also need to point out that some of the comparisons here seem to imply that the barbarian isn't a dwarf.
Finally, how much weight do we give towards the High Mastery of DD given that Axe and Hammer aren't the best weapon choices (barb can specialise in 4 weapons quite easily to cover a speed weapon, FoA and Celestial Fury for instance).
Doing some beginner necromancy with this thread, but I come with something new related to this thread: Fighter Cleric dual wielding a Defender of Easthaven and whatever else. Along with hardiness and armor of Faith, it would have 85% damage reduction along with all the priest buffs which would give him a superior DPR compared to both barbarian and DDef. As a matter of fact, most damages would be reduced to something like 3-5 and might be fully tanked with some regen+ the silver dragon armor
Doing some beginner necromancy with this thread, but I come with something new related to this thread: Fighter Cleric dual wielding a Defender of Easthaven and whatever else. Along with hardiness and armor of Faith, it would have 85% damage reduction along with all the priest buffs which would give him a superior DPR compared to both barbarian and DDef. As a matter of fact, most damages would be reduced to something like 3-5 and might be fully tanked with some regen+ the silver dragon armor
If you've got 85% physical damage reduction you basically aren't going to by taking physical damage if you've got the Regeneration spell also active. You'd have to take more than 120 damage/round for you to take any physical damage. That said once you are at the point of having Hardiness you are probably going to be in a good position to avoid taking a lot of damage either way.
Comments
The DD has 18 Str at start, +1 with the Tome in BG1.
+1 with MoLtM
+2 with Hell Trials (+1 if you are using I don't which mod or version of the game which fix the main stat gain when killing Wraith Sarevok)
+1 from the Deck
=23 (24).
+4 Str won't do much.
So no, the STR bonus from rage is a pretty big deal, from Candlekeep to the Throne of Bhaal. The barbarian will do 3 or 4 more damage per hit than the DD when raging. Sometimes more. At no point in the entire saga is that STR bonus "wasted." Not even close.
It's also worth noting that going from 24 to 25 strength gives +1 attack and +2 damage.
Still, it doesn't make a huge difference. What does +3 damage represents in late game ? +10% damage ? It will nearly never be enough to make or break a fight.
On the contrary the Defensive Stance gives about 100% more EHP which is significant.
To my mind, the true advantage of the Barbarian is definitely his speed compared to the slowed DD. This alone would make me chose the Barb in some situations over the DD.
The DD might still have a defensive advantage, but saying +3 damage doesn't matter is simply not true.
For the most part it just keeps barbarian ahead of DD who has High Mastery in axes and hammers.
But actually, the 2 classes are very different in the early game:
- the barb is much stronger offensively when he is using rage and much stronger against mages but is clearly not a tank (no DR, no heavy armor)
- the DD is a tank from the start of the game thanks to stance
The more the game progress, the more the differences disappear:
- the barb gets better at tanking (innate DR, very good light armors and AC beginning to be useless, hardiness)
- the DD closes the gap offensively (lower impact of rage, lower impact of +2-3 damage/attack) and for magical defense (saves deeply under 0)
At the end of game, both are very good tanks and very good offensively. At this stage, the barb has probably the upper end thanks to his superior running speed.
Also need to point out that some of the comparisons here seem to imply that the barbarian isn't a dwarf.
Finally, how much weight do we give towards the High Mastery of DD given that Axe and Hammer aren't the best weapon choices (barb can specialise in 4 weapons quite easily to cover a speed weapon, FoA and Celestial Fury for instance).
Fighter Cleric dual wielding a Defender of Easthaven and whatever else. Along with hardiness and armor of Faith, it would have 85% damage reduction along with all the priest buffs which would give him a superior DPR compared to both barbarian and DDef. As a matter of fact, most damages would be reduced to something like 3-5 and might be fully tanked with some regen+ the silver dragon armor