View Single Post
Old 08-22-2003, 10:24 PM   #1
Borg
The Magister
 

Join Date: March 25, 2003
Location: San Francisco
Age: 53
Posts: 137
I have a party (monk, barb, paladin, cleric(2x)/fighter(x), bard, wizard) that just entered chap 5 and have come to the conclusion that I'd be better off with a fighter than a barbarian. To me, one of the best things about the barbarian is the rage feat, but I've recently found the beauty of the Bull's Strength spell -- that spell last 8 hours (basically about as long as you go before resting) and gives the same or more strength bonus as a barb's rage does. True, rage also gives a CON bonus, but unless you come very close to death AND heal the barb before rage ends, that's not too useful.

So, then you are left with the HP advantage and limited high-lvl damage reduction a barb gets over a fighter. But, a fighter gets so many more feats, can be more specialized in weapons (right?), and is much more flexible.

So, other than for role-playing reasons (which you must admit is limited in IWD2), can anybody justify a Barb over a Fighter?
Borg is offline   Reply With Quote