Barbarian Essentials - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Barbarian Essentials

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
zupan
Feb 03, 2010 14:02:42
So I was looking over the article Barbarian Essentials, specifically the part about the Whirling Slayer build. Now while I agree with Mr. Heinsoo about Whirling Rend as a must have attack power, I'm confused about Devastating Strike. I'm confused because a Whirling Slayer can't use Devastating Strike unless he drops one of his weapons. RAW states that "Requirement: Must be wielding a melee weapon in two hands." So while it may seem that Devastating Strike would be a no brainer at first glance I can't see where a build that depends on movement and two weapons would take a power they can't use half the time. And Whirling Rend states "Requirement: Must be wielding two melee weapons."

Now does wielding a weapon in each hand count as holding a weapon in two hands? Does the Whirling Slayer get an exemption to this much like the Ruthless Ruffian gets one for Rogue powers? Again I find myself more confused about class builds after reading a Class Acts article than I was before.

P.S.

Where is the “Ask the Sage” option when you need it anymore?
#2
ff6shadow
Feb 03, 2010 15:35:53 No, there is no exception,. Further, in my opinion, and the opinions of many I've seen voiced, that article gave overall bad advice.
#3
Janx_14
Feb 03, 2010 15:40:23 Well actually now after errata I believe you can use Devastating Strike with weapons with the Stout property, such as the Double Axe.
#4
ff6shadow
Feb 03, 2010 15:48:09 There is that. Some of the double weapons, courtesy of the Stout property, will allow a Whirler to use Whirling Strike and the two-hander at-wills. . . . . but then, I'd never suggest Devastating Strike to anyone under any circumstance. Howling Strike is just outright superior.
#5
Janx_14
Feb 03, 2010 17:24:48 True, and this oddly enough as about 2 months before the Errata, but it could have been in the making.

The overall article was considered poor quality and faulty though.
#6
zupan
Feb 03, 2010 17:40:14
Well the issue isn't you need a two handed weapon, just a weapon held in two hands. My guess would be that that erratum was designed to allow small sized characters to use versatile weapons like a longsword for Barbarian powers. So a double weapon would work if you burned a feat to use it.

Overall I would have to concur that the article was just plain useless when it came to Barbarians. It's just damn annoying to pay for access to material that isn't reviewed before it's posted. I would like to see some sort of erratum that would allow Whirling Slayer Barbarians to use Barbarian powers as if they were wielding a weapon in two hands. Or maybe that would be too broken.
#7
Janx_14
Feb 03, 2010 23:43:59

Well the issue isn't you need a two handed weapon, just a weapon held in two hands. My guess would be that that erratum was designed to allow small sized characters to use versatile weapons like a longsword for Barbarian powers. So a double weapon would work if you burned a feat to use it.

Overall I would have to concur that the article was just plain useless when it came to Barbarians. It's just damn annoying to pay for access to material that isn't reviewed before it's posted. I would like to see some sort of erratum that would allow Whirling Slayer Barbarians to use Barbarian powers as if they were wielding a weapon in two hands. Or maybe that would be too broken.

Well, only their at-wills require a weapon in 2 hands, and I do not believe their newer ones in Primal Power even do. I doubt it'd be broken though, they are using a small die to begin with.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 zupan Feb 03, 2010 14:02:42	So I was looking over the article Barbarian Essentials, specifically the part about the Whirling Slayer build. Now while I agree with Mr. Heinsoo about Whirling Rend as a must have attack power, I'm confused about Devastating Strike. I'm confused because a Whirling Slayer can't use Devastating Strike unless he drops one of his weapons. RAW states that "Requirement: Must be wielding a melee weapon in two hands." So while it may seem that Devastating Strike would be a no brainer at first glance I can't see where a build that depends on movement and two weapons would take a power they can't use half the time. And Whirling Rend states "Requirement: Must be wielding two melee weapons." Now does wielding a weapon in each hand count as holding a weapon in two hands? Does the Whirling Slayer get an exemption to this much like the Ruthless Ruffian gets one for Rogue powers? Again I find myself more confused about class builds after reading a Class Acts article than I was before. P.S. Where is the “Ask the Sage” option when you need it anymore?
#2 ff6shadow Feb 03, 2010 15:35:53	No, there is no exception,. Further, in my opinion, and the opinions of many I've seen voiced, that article gave overall bad advice.
#3 Janx_14 Feb 03, 2010 15:40:23	Well actually now after errata I believe you can use Devastating Strike with weapons with the Stout property, such as the Double Axe.
#4 ff6shadow Feb 03, 2010 15:48:09	There is that. Some of the double weapons, courtesy of the Stout property, will allow a Whirler to use Whirling Strike and the two-hander at-wills. . . . . but then, I'd never suggest Devastating Strike to anyone under any circumstance. Howling Strike is just outright superior.
#5 Janx_14 Feb 03, 2010 17:24:48	True, and this oddly enough as about 2 months before the Errata, but it could have been in the making. The overall article was considered poor quality and faulty though.
#6 zupan Feb 03, 2010 17:40:14	Well the issue isn't you need a two handed weapon, just a weapon held in two hands. My guess would be that that erratum was designed to allow small sized characters to use versatile weapons like a longsword for Barbarian powers. So a double weapon would work if you burned a feat to use it. Overall I would have to concur that the article was just plain useless when it came to Barbarians. It's just damn annoying to pay for access to material that isn't reviewed before it's posted. I would like to see some sort of erratum that would allow Whirling Slayer Barbarians to use Barbarian powers as if they were wielding a weapon in two hands. Or maybe that would be too broken.
#7 Janx_14 Feb 03, 2010 23:43:59	Well the issue isn't you need a two handed weapon, just a weapon held in two hands. My guess would be that that erratum was designed to allow small sized characters to use versatile weapons like a longsword for Barbarian powers. So a double weapon would work if you burned a feat to use it. Overall I would have to concur that the article was just plain useless when it came to Barbarians. It's just damn annoying to pay for access to material that isn't reviewed before it's posted. I would like to see some sort of erratum that would allow Whirling Slayer Barbarians to use Barbarian powers as if they were wielding a weapon in two hands. Or maybe that would be too broken. Well, only their at-wills require a weapon in 2 hands, and I do not believe their newer ones in Primal Power even do. I doubt it'd be broken though, they are using a small die to begin with.