![]() Nothing is going to change the similarities they already share with each other since the Berserker really is a more mainstreamed take on the Ravager. Bringing in an actual universal class not restricted to a specific setting like the Psionicist would allow for kits, instead of having that Barbarian 'kit' hogging that slot forever.īesides having the Barbarian alongside the Berserker wouldn't be such a big deal, the only argument against it would be aesthetic or a dislike of streamlining the character creation screen. Real estate in the character creation screen is precious, so it doesn't make sense to have it wasted by a 'class' that cannot be expanded with kits. Hence why the developers after opening up the kit menu for the Monk and Sorcerer, left the Barbarian alone. So logically either the Barbarian belongs alongside the Wizard Slayer or the Barbarian should allow kits, of which the Wizard Slayer would be one of them.īut in terms of the Infinity Engine, the Barbarian is assigned as a Fighter kit and not a standalone class. Another Barbarian kit is the Wizard Slayer, of which is listed under the Fighter. The Ravager being the only Barbarian that has access to a rage ability, as the true class does not. Besides it's reinforced in the 2ed anthology supplements like the Priest's or Wizard's Spell Compendium that these Handbook Classes belong in their isolated contexts or worlds since the Barbarian Cleric (the Cleric counterpart to the Barbarian Fighter) spells are restricted to savage settings only.īesides the Barbarian class in BG2 is actually just a Barbarian kit since it is actually based on the Ravager kit, not the true class Barbarian. The Ninja's Handbook describing a variation of the Thief class for the Kara-Tur setting, The Sha'ir's Handbook describing a variation of the Mage class for the Al Qadim setting and the Necromancer's Handbook describing a variation of a mage specialist for an evil campaign. from being their own class in the context of BG.Įven though the Barbarian's Handbook is named a 'handbook' it is in the same league as the Ninja's Handbook, The Sha'ir's Handbook and the Necromancer's Handbook. They do not have the sort of differences that justify a Ranger, Paladin, Bard, Druid, etc. They get to use the next hit dice above their counterparts (1d12 for Fighter & 1d10 for Clerics), they get a movement rate of 15 and both of them are restricted to at most Studded Leather. The Barbarian Fighter and Barbarian Cleric are identical to their Fighter and Cleric counterparts except for three things. Of which are just slight variations on the Fighter and Cleric. So the handbook introduces two classes, the Barbarian Fighter and the Barbarian Cleric or Shaman. The handbook reasons that thievery and arcane magic is extremely rare in a savage setting, so they don't have Barbarian counterparts. So if the DM was to make a campaign set in the wilderness, the players would choose the Barbarian versions instead of their more conventional counterparts. ![]() The Barbarian from the Complete Barbarian's Handbook is not quite a class of its' own but rather an alternate take on the main four archetypes (priest, warrior, rogue, wizard), designed for use in a savage setting or campaign. ![]() So instead of introducing new kits which is something that modders can easily do, adding a new class that is fundamentally different (in terms of its' interface and how it deals with skills) from what is already available would be a pretty big contribution to the game since that is hardcoded and off limits to modders. Kwiat_W has a rather brilliant mod for the Psionicist that proves it is possible to introduce a spell system that is based on points, so the core of Psionicist, the PSP system is possible. Going through the 2ed class handbooks the only universal class not yet available is the Psionicist from the Complete Psionic's Handbook (1991). Not to mention that the most viable Barbarian kit is already listed as a Fighter kit, that being the Wizard Slayer. If it would be too much work, then you could turn the Barbarian from a kit to its' own class with its' own class identifier.Īlthough it is a bit redundant to turn the Barbarian into a proper class since the Fighter kit menu isn't even half full. This would leave that slot open for a class that actually allows for kits. So I suggest that the Barbarian is either moved to the Fighter kit menu to reflect its' true nature as a Fighter kit. The developers can't allow Barbarian kits like they did with the Monk and Sorcerer because it shares the same class identifier as the Fighter. Currently every class allows for kits except for the Barbarian, this is because it is actually a Fighter kit masquerading as a class. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |