Essentials Slayer Build - Not using 2-Handed Weapons
- Thread starter Melkor
- Start date
Quite sub-optimal. If you look at some of their high heroic and low-paragon abilities you will see that they assume two-handed weapons - either an axe or a sword. Slayer are supposed to deal damage, not be heavily armored. That's the role of knights or the PHB 1-handed fighter.
Tony Vargas
Legend
It would be workable at low-level, though you'd still want as big a damage-die as possible, an axe, for instance - it'd work better if you had access to superior weapons. At higher level, you'd start missing out.
Shin Okada
Explorer
Dual-wielding does not help you much (or any), unless you actually have powers or feats which gives you special benefit for using 2 weapons.
I guess if you need a little bit more defense, using a two-handed polearm (either Glaive or Halberd?) and take Hafted Defense is much easier than to use 2 weapons or a double weapon. And reach is useful in many situation.
Amongst double weapons, Urgrosh may have some potential. You can just use the primal +2/1d12 head as a two-handed weapon (Urgrosh has Stout property). Basically, equal to a Greataxe. then, Urgrosh has Defensive property (+1 to AC).
If you take 2 more feats, Two-weapon Fighting and Two-Weapon Defense, you can have another +1 to AC and Ref. But I am not sure if they worth taking.
I guess if you need a little bit more defense, using a two-handed polearm (either Glaive or Halberd?) and take Hafted Defense is much easier than to use 2 weapons or a double weapon. And reach is useful in many situation.
Amongst double weapons, Urgrosh may have some potential. You can just use the primal +2/1d12 head as a two-handed weapon (Urgrosh has Stout property). Basically, equal to a Greataxe. then, Urgrosh has Defensive property (+1 to AC).
If you take 2 more feats, Two-weapon Fighting and Two-Weapon Defense, you can have another +1 to AC and Ref. But I am not sure if they worth taking.
Melkor
Explorer
Yeah, I figured as much.
What I am looking to do is build a Fighter that is simplistic in nature -like the Essentials Knight class- but without the trappings associated with being a "Knight." I want him to use the classical sword and shield.
So should I just make up a Knight and call him a fighter, and not include any of the roleplaying elements of the Knight class?
What I am looking to do is build a Fighter that is simplistic in nature -like the Essentials Knight class- but without the trappings associated with being a "Knight." I want him to use the classical sword and shield.
So should I just make up a Knight and call him a fighter, and not include any of the roleplaying elements of the Knight class?
Shin Okada
Explorer
Regarding purely role-playing elements, they are just fluffs. Your Knight can be of any background and personality.
But mechanically, a Knight as a build is still a defender. It's class features and powers are focused on protecting others. If that is OK, just make a Knight and call it in any name. Your Knight maybe truly a honorable Knight, or an outlaw fighter who is just good at fighting alongside some other gangs.
If that is not what you want, and you want to make a striker, whom simply continue to strike opponents until they die (melee striker) .... well, if I were you, I will talk to the DM and use all the rules regarding Slayer, including that using two-handed weapon by the rule, but describe that he is using sword and shield.
By the rule, your fighter is using a, say, Fullblade. Regarding all the rules, It works as if he is only using one two-handed weapon. Your [W] is 1d12. You don't gain any benefit from that imaginary shield. Maybe you can use your "shield hand" as easily as a combatant who has only one big weapon. But in your fantasy world, he looks like having a big one-handed weapon and a shield.
Actually, the game designers and DMs are doing nearly the same thing for monsters. A monster's damage and defenses are based on their level and role, not on their gears.
But mechanically, a Knight as a build is still a defender. It's class features and powers are focused on protecting others. If that is OK, just make a Knight and call it in any name. Your Knight maybe truly a honorable Knight, or an outlaw fighter who is just good at fighting alongside some other gangs.
If that is not what you want, and you want to make a striker, whom simply continue to strike opponents until they die (melee striker) .... well, if I were you, I will talk to the DM and use all the rules regarding Slayer, including that using two-handed weapon by the rule, but describe that he is using sword and shield.
By the rule, your fighter is using a, say, Fullblade. Regarding all the rules, It works as if he is only using one two-handed weapon. Your [W] is 1d12. You don't gain any benefit from that imaginary shield. Maybe you can use your "shield hand" as easily as a combatant who has only one big weapon. But in your fantasy world, he looks like having a big one-handed weapon and a shield.
Actually, the game designers and DMs are doing nearly the same thing for monsters. A monster's damage and defenses are based on their level and role, not on their gears.
I can only find features at level 7 and 12 that specifically mention two-handers, the level 7 modifies powerstrike, the level 12 is the paragon path utility. I seriously think you could play without them, especially if you took a different paragon path. Any slayer wanting to wield a maul will be in a similar boat.
Another option is that the Knight mirrors those features exactly (i mean exactly, level 7 modifies power strike in exactly the same way, level 12 has slightly different tirggers, but very similar concept). Just grab those instead at the appropriate level, DM approval needed of course.
Or play a """knight""" who is whatever you want him to be by trade, that would be the optimal, no approval needed route.
Another option is that the Knight mirrors those features exactly (i mean exactly, level 7 modifies power strike in exactly the same way, level 12 has slightly different tirggers, but very similar concept). Just grab those instead at the appropriate level, DM approval needed of course.
Or play a """knight""" who is whatever you want him to be by trade, that would be the optimal, no approval needed route.
Similar Threads
AD6_gamerati_skyscraper
Recent & Upcoming Releases
-
April 16 2024 -
May 31 2024 -
June 3 2024 -
June 4 2024 -
June 18 2024 -
July 16 2024 -
September 17 2024 -
October 1 2024 -
November 12 2024 -
February 18 2025
