Should i multiclass??

[Ace]

Thats some tank!

My advice is to go with fighter till level 4 at least. Multiclassing is OK butif you want to I would take a level of barbarian as a few here have suggested..

Speed, Rage, a few extra HP are well worth the feat you might loose.

 

[River]

Speaking as a only mildly penatant power gamer I'd take a cleric level.

What you get is

1. An unstuffy Cleric!
2. The Sphere special abilities can be very nice. If your happy go lucy dwarf takes luck and travel the special abilities (and acces to cooler skills) alone become worth the loss of +1 BAB. and an average of 1 HP.
3. Better saves, Fort and WIL. That modest jump in your will save is teriffic for a fighter.
4. Last but not least.... SPELLS

1st level cleric spells will give you a lot of versatality!

River

 

[Maldur]

The two dwarfs in my campaign prove that both choices are good roleplaying. One went the Fighter/TWF way and the other the Cleric way.

I would say: If your in doubt go for 4 levels fighter for weap-spec and in the meen time think about class progression keeping both roleplaying and game-mechanics as your deciding factors.

either way: have a good game

 

[Hescamar]

After reading through all of your posts (i dont have access to internet every day) i have decided to go with fighter at least until lvl 4, and then i will see what to do.

Thanks alot for for your advises


////Hescamar

 

[Umbran]

A +3 longsword costs 18,315 gp.

Two +2 shortswords cost 16,620 gp.

It's not too bad.

Yes, but it is also not the right comparison - you are wasting a hand. You are comparing a longsword (a one handed weapon) with two shortswords - two light weapons.

If you're looking to maximize damage, compare a two handed weapon (say, a greatsword) with two light weapons (two shortswords).

Even if we turn that longsword into a greatsword, we don't actually expect much (if any) benefit to the two shortswords in damage - the two shortsowrds have one extra point of enhancement bonus, but they will each hit less often. The enhancement bonus to damage isn't the real issue.

You start seeing notably greater damage potential when you start adding extra dice of damage - from, say a flaming weapon. Two flaming +2 shorswords cost in the neighborhood of 36,000 gp. One +2 holy weapon costs around 32,000. Still, not too bad, you might say. But the extra 4,000 gp is equivalent to a whole list of lesser items - including gaultlets of ogre power, or a set of boots and cloak of elvenkind...

And that's if the DM in question allows you to get whatever weapons you want, whenever you want them, at DMG prices. While many may allow that, many don't. If the player is going to min/max, he should take into account how likely he is to get the items required to take greatest advantage of his feat choices.

 

[CRGreathouse]

I know the math on TWF quite well - I've run the numbers on huge Excel spreadsheets of my own design. I agree with most of your points, but the cost difference isn't the real problem - it's the -2 attack penalty.

When comparing two +2 weapons compared to a single +3 weapon, the +2 weapons have more damage (+4 vs. +3) but less of an attack bonus (+0 vs. +3). That is the argument against TWF stripped to its most basic form.

 

[Polydamas]

......
Barbarian: One level could be useful.....
......Don't get another level. The uncanny dodge will not help you that much with your current dex.

I have to respectfully disagree. The uncanny dodge strength is not the AC bonus, but avoiding sneak attacks from rogue w/ higher initiative or invisibility, and keeping you AoO's always available.

 

[Umbran]

CRGreathouse:

Well, if you think one step farther, you might agree that cost is an additional issue.

As you saw, I compared a pair of +3 equivalent weapons with one +4 equivalent. Even though the number of dice of damage they produce is about the same, the to-hit modifiers leads to the pair having lesser average damage. And they are already more expensive than the single weapon.

Now, the simple way to get equal or better damage out of the pair is to raise the equivalent bonus - add more enhancement bonus, or more dice of "elemental" damage. But then you're likely to need to double the overall cost of your weaponry, or worse!

Do you want to tell me that a fighter isn't going to care if he'll need to use twice as much cash to get the same mileage out of a fighting style?

 

[Darkness]

Speaking as a only mildly penatant power gamer I'd take a cleric level.

What you get is

1. An unstuffy Cleric!
2. The Sphere special abilities can be very nice. If your happy go lucy dwarf takes luck and travel the special abilities (and acces to cooler skills) alone become worth the loss of +1 BAB. and an average of 1 HP.

From a powergaming aspect, I'd strongly consider the Destruction and Strength Domains. Combined with decent combat skills, this can get ugly real quick.

 

[Cullain]

Re: Re: Uh...

I, of course, cannot speak to your experience. However, barring particular types of magic weapons, I believe the number crunching shows that for most fighters, using one weapon 2-handed yields higher average damage (this includes the strength and to-hit modifications) than two weapons one-handed.

What the number crunching also fails to factor in is wasted damage. If a critter has 2 h.p. left, it doesn't matter if you do 5 points of 25 points to it, really. But the spreadsheets don't/can't take it into account. Again, it really depends on the sort of creatures your DM sends after you.

Cullain