Best 2nd weapon proficiencies for F->C?
sorcerin
Member Posts: 58
Hello,
Question: What's the best secondary weapon proficiency for my dual-class fighter clerics?
Background: I'm playing through an Insane difficulty HoF game (started at level 1). My party is as follows:
1. Human Cavalier (TWF/longswords)
2. Human Fighter (7) -> Cleric (13) (TWF/flails [GM])
3. Human Fighter (7) -> Cleric (13) (TWF/hammers [GM])
4. Half-Elf Skald
5. Half-Elf Sorcerer
6. Half-Orc Fighter/Thief (TWF/longswords/longbows/axes)
The first fighter cleric has one pip in maces, hammers, and slings. The second fighter cleric has one pip in flails, maces, and slings. (I maxed out pips in primary weapon during fighter phase, then distributed pips to other weapons in cleric phase before completing the dual-class process, in order to not waste any pips.)
My analysis: I think mace might be the best, because I'm guaranteed to get at least on +4 mace. The other two (flails and hammers) are too RNG-heavy on drops to risk building up points as secondary proficiencies.
Am I wrong on this?
Question: What's the best secondary weapon proficiency for my dual-class fighter clerics?
Background: I'm playing through an Insane difficulty HoF game (started at level 1). My party is as follows:
1. Human Cavalier (TWF/longswords)
2. Human Fighter (7) -> Cleric (13) (TWF/flails [GM])
3. Human Fighter (7) -> Cleric (13) (TWF/hammers [GM])
4. Half-Elf Skald
5. Half-Elf Sorcerer
6. Half-Orc Fighter/Thief (TWF/longswords/longbows/axes)
The first fighter cleric has one pip in maces, hammers, and slings. The second fighter cleric has one pip in flails, maces, and slings. (I maxed out pips in primary weapon during fighter phase, then distributed pips to other weapons in cleric phase before completing the dual-class process, in order to not waste any pips.)
My analysis: I think mace might be the best, because I'm guaranteed to get at least on +4 mace. The other two (flails and hammers) are too RNG-heavy on drops to risk building up points as secondary proficiencies.
Am I wrong on this?
0
Comments