Dual wielding with two, 2-handed weapons...

Pretty cool with the Barbarism idea.

"

bilun wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Barbarism
You can wield Two-Handed Axes, Swords, and Maces in one hand.
You cannot Cast Spells.

That means: No Auras, no Curses, no trigger gems, no Enduring Cry. You might have three six-links, but without the ability to use spells, you probably won't be able to use all your sockets anyway.

That would certainly do it as well. My only complaint is it would make for a fairly one dimensional build experience- it takes away most spheres of character specialization, resulting in only a few things left to specialize in, resulting in all builds using it being nearly identical(pure melee attackers who get all their damage strictly from gear and lack much utility).

On the plus side though, it would be a nice buff for blood magic, since blood magic users already basically can't use auras.

"

DarkHeart69 wrote:

You would have to put all your utility on different attacks... aka: endurance charge on stun with a decked out stun attack. Maybe even a real use for cast on melee kill, unless the spell limitation gets rid of the ability to use it.

bilun sees the problem but not the solution, DarkHeart is closer to the solution. I said no Enduring Cry, not no Endurance Charges... the trick would be getting utility out of attack plans which players currently avoid, opting for spell-based options instead.

Perhaps the introduction of a few more carefully-constructed Attack gems, to provide the right kinds of utility, would make the concept of the keystone a good one. Consider how 1.06 changed the number of utility options which summoners had available... you can do similar things with Barbarism, giving it its own specialized skills which other builds wouldn't be inclined to use.

And if actually contemplating how to design new gems specifically for Barbarism builds doesn't convince you the keystone would be a good idea, I don't know how to convince you further.

I would make it: you can wield two two handed weapons at the cost of your chest armor slot. So you trade defense for attack and your max number of gem slots stays the same. the problem will bringer of rain witch is balanced around having no chest armor.

"

Siblis wrote:

I would make it: you can wield two two handed weapons at the cost of your chest armor slot. So you trade defense for attack and your max number of gem slots stays the same. the problem will bringer of rain witch is balanced around having no chest armor.

It's very odd that you know the precise reason why your idea would never work, yet you still say you'd do it that way.

Well, devs can make it so only one item may lock another slot : BoR locking chest, OR dual 2H - not two locks on chest piece.

Up to them to give the idea a spin now.

"

Netsky wrote:

Well, devs can make it so only one item may lock another slot : BoR locking chest, OR dual 2H - not two locks on chest piece.

Up to them to give the idea a spin now.

Look, even if "no chest" was the drawback to 2h-to-1h, it would still be just better to go 2h dual-wield for almost every dual-wield character. The chest piece isn't the most exciting gear slot in the world, and you'd have two 6Ls as opposed to dual-wielding's usual one.

The inability to cast Spells is a far greater drawback than not wearing a chest.

Lol people claiming "mandatory" and "OP" before even considering the fact that there would be a downside, what that downside would be, and with zero information on any kind of numerical modifications to damage or defences.

How about thinking before shooting ideas down, people?

"

That would certainly do it as well. My only complaint is it would make for a fairly one dimensional build experience- it takes away most spheres of character specialization, resulting in only a few things left to specialize in,

No worse than things like my one button facebreaker build that doesn't even curse Vulnerability manually. I don't see anything forcing you to take this keystone, either.

really brings memories of good ol game... go for it plis GGG...........

2handed weapons in D2 had different values when wielded in 1hand by a barbarian.
Nonetheless, I like Scrotie's solution to the issues presented.

It would actually add new gameplay to the game - something other than spamming supportive spells and a single hypersupported skill.

You'd see players using attack A for stun, attack B for heal, attack C for damage, etc.
+1