Trying to make dual-wielding a bit better

Proposed feat:

DOUBLE STRIKE [GENERAL]
Prerequisite: Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Dex 15+
Benefit: This feat allows you to make two attacks, one with your primary weapon and one with your off-hand weapon, as a standard action. These attacks are at your highest attack bonus, with the standard -2 penalty for dual-wielding.
Normal: A character without Double Strike may only make one attack as a standard action.
Special: This feat may not be used in conjunction with the Spring Attack feat. A fighter may select Double Strike as one of his bonus feats.

Comments?

Grog said:

Special: This feat may not be used in conjunction with the Spring Attack feat.

Click to expand...

To me, one of the main reasons for a feat like this, is to make two-weapon fighting a viable option for a spring attacker.

Spring Attack fits my image of a ligtly armored skirmisher wielding two shortswords or two handaxes. Yet, at present you need a high damage dealing (preferably two-handed) weapon to use Spring Attack optimally.

Grayhawk said:

To me, one of the main reasons for a feat like this, is to make two-weapon fighting a viable option for a spring attacker.

Click to expand...

I thought there might be a balance issue here. A rogue being able to run in, make two sneak attacks, then run back out might be a bit too much. This way, if a rogue wants to jump in and make two sneak attacks, he'll have to expose himself to retaliation, which would mean the player would need to weigh the decision carefully.

The feat is nice... but I'd rather have some real rules about how twoweapon light armoured dudes are supposed to be more mobile fighters than greatswordwieldling, sneak attacking barbarian rogues with tumble

Grog said:

I thought there might be a balance issue here. A rogue being able to run in, make two sneak attacks, then run back out might be a bit too much. This way, if a rogue wants to jump in and make two sneak attacks, he'll have to expose himself to retaliation, which would mean the player would need to weigh the decision carefully.

Click to expand...

How about making one attack with combined weapon damage? That way only one sneak attack would apply. Your Double Strike would do 1d8+1d6 at -2 which is comparable to a greatsword's 2d6.


Aaron

Aaron2 said:

How about making one attack with combined weapon damage? That way only one sneak attack would apply. Your Double Strike would do 1d8+1d6 at -2 which is comparable to a greatsword's 2d6.

Click to expand...

Hmm. Not a bad idea. I'd also add in whatever bonus damage applied for each attack, excepting sneak attack of course.

The thing is, at base, a character with two short swords who got exactly the same number of attacks as a greatsword user with both of their weapons, and suffered no to-hit penalties would be in exactly the same place damage wise as a greatsworder - and would still be in an inferior position with things like Cleave unless cleaving allowed them to attack with both weapons.

TWF has the following drawbacks:

1> You attack less.
2> It costs feats.
3> It suffers penalties to-hit.

The only meaningful advantage you get out of it is:

1> You apply your static damage bonuses more often in some circumstances.

So feats that give you arbitrary damage bonuses make TWF more attractive. Feats that just let you attack with both of your weapons under more circumstances really don't - after all a Great Sword Wielder can already attack with both arms in every attack he ever gets for free.

TWF is underpowered - especially in 3.5. Even if Improved and Greater TWF were included with the TWF feat it would still be underpowered. Adding more feats into the chain of ITWF that allow the two weapon fighter to "catch up" to the greatsword fighter is just kicking the two weapon fighter in the crotch over and over again.

They need static damage bonuses. It is the only justification the fighting style has in D&D - and this feat doesn't give it to them so it doesn't help.

-Frank

How bout this?

Distraction[General]
You have learned that having an extra weapon can draw a targets attention away from the real threat.
Prerequisite: Improved Two Weapon Fighting, Dex 15+
Benefit: On only one of your attacks in a round you may declare a Distraction attack before the attack roll is made. This attack denies the target any shield bonus and applies a -2 penalty to their defense. Also, you may applie 1.5x your strength bonus to the damage of your weapon.
Regular: You may not do any of this without this feat.
Special: You may take this feat multiple times, each time choosing one of the following: A)Gaining a second use per round of the feat; B) Increasing the defense penalty by an additional -1; C) Increasing the the damage by +1
Special: A fighter may select this feat as a bonus feat.
Special: A rogue may not use this feat in conjunction with a sneak attack. The target is already unaware and cannot be made more so.

How's this for balance? Built on the fly, so I don't know how good it'll work.

EDIT: Wording fixed.

Mechanically it should give you a +2 bonus to-hit since it is just for you (otherwise it implies that you can declare other peoples' attacks as distraction attacks).

Further, if it is for TWFs, it should actually require you to be armed with two weapons to claim the bonus.

Also, nothing should preclude sneak attacking - that's a bad mechanic. bonuses from different classes should stack as much as possible.

-Frank

Frankt is so right about the problem with TWF fighters: You don't need more feats. There are already so many you should take, having more wouldn't really solve the problem.

Edit: Anyone has a houserule without using feats to adress this?