Sooo...Barbs forgot how to dual weild?

General Discussion
Prev 1 16 17 18

There is no reason why a Barbarian should not be able to wield two "2-handed" weapons, and suffer some kind of stat penalty to balance the mechanics (as many have said here).

For the purpose of aesthetics, if nothing else, I agree completely with the OP - Barbarians should be able to dual-wield 2-handed weapons.

Be more constructive or shut the hell up.

You know it's hard to balance duel wielding 2handers in D3 because D3's game mechanics is totally different than D2. They've got enough headache in how much weapon dmg each skill deals, since every skill's damage comes from gear+weapon stats. You really think they'll go through all the trouble bringing two 2handers into the equation?

If it's just for the pure purpose of aesthetics, they can just make the rune sword look bigger in game, as big as the warlord sword. That saves 'em lots of trouble and makes you happy. Is this idea constructive for ya?
Nice Post! I agree, they should be able to dual wield 2 handers with a dmg penalty!
Those that mention that you cannot dual wield skorn due to unique equip tends to be oblivious to the scenario whereby even a Rare 6-affix 2-H sword can roll 600-primary stats, 600-Vitality, 200% critical damage , open socket, leech life, LoH and other stats.

Skorn unique affix which make it legendary is the 90+% Bleed chance and high damage, which is good, but not sought after. Everyone who uses skorn is due to it rolling those desired affix which make it common and affordable.

Being uniquely equipped doesn't prevent any imbalance......seriously.
Neither does halving the damage.
50% main hand + 50% offhand for 1-h DW => 100% main hand with no off hand for 2-H
The above is the current simplified system but the request change will be as follow
100% main hand (2-H) + 0% damage off-hand ( 2-H ) =>
100% + 0% is still 100%, no matter how you tweak the main-hand and raise the damage on off-hand, you still get 100% unless you're requesting for even more buff.

Would you still dual wield 2-h? YES! Why? Because of the stats in off-hand.

Another scenario would be halving the stats and damage as some suggested, which means in a case of 2 identical 2-h weapon, you're ignoring every properties of one of them.
The equation 100% + 0% = 50% + 50% stills applies. Which in other words, you're just asking the 2-H as off-hand feature for aesthetic purpose. for barb only. Aren't there more important things to settle first?

Replacing one passive to have the graphic feature is too much (penalty), whereas, replacing one passive for stats in offhand (with or without damage) is too much(buff) also.

Last suggestion, which is 2-h sword with 1-hand damage(barb only) is exactly the same as 1-h mighty weapon, just a different name. What's there to ask for? If Blizzard implement this changes without fixing the situation on-hand, players from other classes will flare up again.

I'm not exactly opposing this idea, as I play all my classes almost equally (favourite is wizard), but as of now, there's just too many things to be fixed.
Because Diablo 3 is a new different game.
Apart from everything here. With the current set up of stat rolls and effects of 2-handed weapon it is a large bonus for a barb to be able to dual wield 2-hand weapons ie. the doubled stat bonuses.

A whole new line of code would need to be written out just for this, and would alter a lot of the game-play overall for barbarians. Their damage output would be phenomenally high compared to other classes.

Yes, there could be a stat roll x, when dual wield divide by two, but that would make you end up with the exact same stat rolls as any other 1-handed weapon. thus partially invalidating any reason to dual wield what-so-ever. (unless you wanted to attack uber slow while dual wielding).

I do have a couple ideas to make this possible that somewhat go along with things that have been said about this subject. It theoretically could be added in an Expansion for the game.

Add another passive skill for each class. Barbarians would get a skill with a name relative to "Strength of an Ox", "Strength of the Ancestors (or ancients)" or even something simple like "Two-Handed Mastery" that then "Calls (or Gives) power from the Ancestors (or Ancients) to let you wield a Two-Handed weapon in one hand." Yet again, flavor the skill with the Lore of sanctuary to make it more viable or realistic for the character. Even though many would be happy with just a passive "Two-Handed Mastery", "Gain the ability to use Two-Handed Weapons in one hand."

That being said, of course there will have to be some draw back to this skill, (besides the fact that it takes a passive slot) to even the bases of the character and make it balanced along with everything else and, you know, promote build diversity.

First, I have to state a couple more problems that need to be solved with this method. The technical wordage and layout of the skill let's you use a Two-Handed weapon in one hand. This means, yes, you can dual-wield them now. However, you will now be able to wield a two-handed weapon and a Shield. If you have been following everything I have been saying then you should also have realized that this would be way over powered statistically wise.

On that last note, remember you are losing a passive skill to obtain this ability, so ask yourself, "What would hinder the barbarian statistically enough to account for the abundant stat gains?"

Let's throw out there (for time sake) the secondary part of the skill hinders your character by 20% or I mean "Calls power from the Ancestors to let you wield a Two-Handed weapon in one hand, but reduces your base damage and armor by 20%." Short version, "Calls power to wield Two-Handed weapons single handed but you forfeit strength and defense."

I will now explain the 20%. Lets say you have a awesome Two-Handed weapon that does... I don't know 1600 dps. Base damage would be 1400-1800 at attacks per second 1.0. this would now become 1280 dps with 1120-1440 at 1.0 attacks per second. That is 200 dps lower than I have seen a One-Handed weapon have. Which also accounts for the extra critical damage bonuses you receive.

Now, you have 6000 armor, so you put a shield on giving you 7400 armor, and since your wield in your main-hand a two-handed weapon you would obviously lose some efficiency in protecting yourself, even with a shield. So, 20% off of 7400 is 5920 armor. Wow! look at that loss of damage mitigation. So with this skill in there, it would require you to go big or go home. Especially since you lose another passive to be able to do this. How many people would actually go out of their way to do this? The people would like to use two-handed weapons in one hand of course.

It definitely would be interesting to see on a graph of players that would use this (after it's in a pre-patch or something a-like so people get a real feel for it).

Like I stated in the beginning though, this would take a whole new branch of coding to enable this and ensure it doesn't glitch so people dual-wield and switch skills keeping their items in the same space.

Questions that may arise:

What about the high main stat roll you can get raising your damage and strength more than normal?
The extra strength acts as a balance and drive towards making the 20% base damage reduction fall in line with One-Handed weapons, and 6000 armor +500 extra strength at 20% means still a measly 5200 armor.

What about wielding two Skorns?
They are Unique Equip so it is impossible to do that.

What about the 15% attack speed bonus for dual-wielding?
If the dps output seems a bit too high for Blizzard then making the skill 25% base damage reduction would account for any other differences.

Any further questions and constructive criticism would be appreciated, but this is what my thought are on this matter.
i like dual weild, using set of BK sword =)
Wow... buff Barb?

Barb already spin2win, and with this request... how about making all monsters and elites immediately explode and die when it see a barb dual weal 2 handed weapon.

There is a reason why it is call: 2 handed weapon.

Stop being low using gender to justify your request. Barb or Enchantress, both are with 2 hands.

01/27/2013 09:06 PMPosted by Ewokese
Agreed. Barbs do not need anymore buffs. How about give the witch doctor and the wizard's 5 arms so they can hold 5 weapons, no even better HOLD 5 2-HANDED WEAPONS!! and give them 300% movement speed. k thx

01/27/2013 09:13 PMPosted by ViciousPanda
I think monks should get two pairs of gloves. I mean, male monks are bald. This causes us to get cold and it's hard to generate spirit when you're cold. Two pairs of gloves would help.

Such constructive feedback from the smart society...

They're Blizzard fans, it's all they know how to do.
as long as its balanced i love and support the idea.

On that last note, remember you are losing a passive skill to obtain this ability, so ask yourself, "What would hinder the barbarian statistically enough to account for the abundant stat gains?"

Any further questions and constructive criticism would be appreciated, but this is what my thought are on this matter.

What you suggest is meaningful and interesting, the passive + drawback need testing to have a balance. Likewise having a check in which off-hand will be unequipped if the passive is changed.
You mentioned about wielding 2-H + shield, and I notice the problem might surface if player choose to 2-H + 1-H, if the attack speed is based on main hand, 2-H will definitely act as off-hand.

Skorn is not the only powerful 2-H as I mentioned in my earlier post. Other 2-H rares can roll the same stats as skorn, just as different weapon type, might not be black and cannot roll 90+ bleed chance. Those good stats can still appear in any 2-H, just that the rarity make their cost very high in AH.

Last but not least, since Barb gets the privileged to dual wield 2-H from passive, should give the options to the other classes too:
1: Dual wielding spears Demon hunter (javazon)
2: Dual wielding daggers Demon hunter (Fan of knives)
3: Quiver for Witch Doctor (WD skill Manticore anyone?)
4: Dual wielding daggers and ceremony knives (WD)
5: Quiver for Wizard (Intel Windforce anyone?)
6: Dual wielding wands and daggers (Wizardspike is a dagger)
7: Fist and Daibo (so Monks don't feel left out)

Note that above demands are the same as 2-H DW, since the respective classes will need to sacrifice one PASSIVE and balance the benefits to use them.

Barbarians shouldn't be the one class reaping all the benefits since it's is the only class from D2.
its funny he states he doesnt want the barb buffed, but the first few pages of posts most ppl are chewing him out like he ment buff. i agree from a lore stand point why the cant the barb wield 2 two handers one in each, yes they are called 2 handers b/c the amount of strength required to wield them for a normal person takes 2 hands. this is a barbarian, spent its entire life training and fighting i think it'd be tough enough to duel wield 2handers
All the two handed weapons are very weak in comparison to the single handed weapons thats why nobody uses them, you get way more power wielding one in each hand,its sad really that they dont make the two handed weapons more powerful.
Not to mention you can"t give them away on the auction house nobody wants them.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum