General Discussion Thread VIII

[Bront]

This position makes the most sense to me. If you are making one attack, no TWF penalty. If you are making multiple attacks using only one weapon, no TWF penalty. If you have two weapons in your hands, TWD bonuses apply regardless.

Agreed. If you're using the short sword to defend with it, does it matter if you also attack with it or not? The feat simply states that when wielding 2 weapons, you gain a +1 shield bonus. Doesn't say anything about attacking.

I think this is the most generous application to TWD, and still leaves TWD trailling lamely behind improved shield bash in many ways.

Agreed, for the same reasons you mention, as far as pure defense goes. Obviously, for offense, you're better off with TWD, since you can use a true weapon in the off hand.

I guess the problem is that there are people who view that if you have a weapon in each hand, you get the two weapon penalty on any attack, regardless of if you attack with both. And I don't buy it, because why would it make any difference if I had a sword, a shield, or a torch in my off hand if I'm not using it (For anything combat related, let alone defense). Much like a Monk can flury of blows and mix in multiple weapons, and should not be charged for using 2 weapons durring a flury, because that's how the ability is written. (I've seen people argue with this one too.)

 

[Manzanita]

Since this situation has already come up more than once, and eventually a DM and I may take different tacks on this, I'd appriciate a preliminary judges ruling on the issue. (esp since it would effect whether I keep the character around after this adventure).

Hey- you can't retire Sara! She's so much fun. I love her personality. And Iggy would miss her terribly! Fortunately, the judges seem to agree with your take. My impression, based on my limited experience rather than rigorous study of the RAW, is that TWF looses much of its advantage after PCs gain multiple attacks based on BAB. I don't think it's overpowered, and am happy to give the TWD bonus when attacking with one weapon, and holding the other in the other hand.

 

[Patlin]

Hey- you can't retire Sara! She's so much fun. I love her personality. And Iggy would miss her terribly! Fortunately, the judges seem to agree with your take. My impression, based on my limited experience rather than rigorous study of the RAW, is that TWF looses much of its advantage after PCs gain multiple attacks based on BAB. I don't think it's overpowered, and am happy to give the TWD bonus when attacking with one weapon, and holding the other in the other hand.

I agree: gotta love Sara. She may yet get everyone killed, but she's a lot of fun.

As to whether TWF even has any advantaged, that's a whole other debate, and it tends to be hotly disputed. Greatsword: 2d6+strength and a half. Two shortswords: 1d6+strength+1d6+half strength. Hmmmm..... All this for a -2 penalty to hit and a feat, not to mention additional expense in item aquisition. And that's assuming full attacks, on a standard action it gets significantly worse. This may not be the forum in which to continue that old saw, however.

Edit: I should admit it depends on the character and what other kinds of damage you have. TWF is an easy choice for a melee rogue, and even a favored enemy bonus skews things in favor of TWF.

 

[El Jefe]

Hey- you can't retire Sara! She's so much fun. I love her personality.

Neither of my characters has ever been in an adventure with her, but I have the same impression just from reading old adventure threads.

My impression, based on my limited experience rather than rigorous study of the RAW, is that TWF looses much of its advantage after PCs gain multiple attacks based on BAB.

I think that for adventurers of that level, it depends on the opponent. For the big, bad, boss monster with the high AC, I suspect people will drop the extra attack. But in the slaughter situation against the horde of low AC underlings, -2 or even -4 to hit means nothing, and the extra attack equals one more baddie dispatched each round.

 

[Bront]

FYI, There is an adventure recruiting at the Red Dragon Inn (here). I realize many people are away for the holiday, so I mention it here as well.

 

[Patlin]

FYI, There is an adventure recruiting at the Red Dragon Inn (here). I realize many people are away for the holiday, so I mention it here as well.

By which you are referring to your adventure for disreputable PCs? Isn't it recruiting just *outside* the inn?

 

[Rystil Arden]

I guess we don't have as many disreputable PCs above level 1 as I had thought--although Zaeryl is less disreputable than he is amoral, but either one works just as well

 

[Bront]

Yeah, I guess it could be, but no one's even asked beyond the first 2.

There are 2 others in the Inn at least, but one is me, so that doesn't work

We'll see. If a bunch of L1s beat down the door, I might honor their wish and <s>kill</s> include them. Could also be the holidays.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Yeah, I guess it could be, but no one's even asked beyond the first 2.

There are 2 others in the Inn at least, but one is me, so that doesn't work

We'll see. If a bunch of L1s beat down the door, I might honor their wish and <s>kill</s> include them. Could also be the holidays.

That could be. Was Almayce the one who wanted to use undead horses to travel more in a day?

 

[El Jefe]

That could be. Was Almayce the one who wanted to use undead horses to travel more in a day?

Waddaya expect from a Priest of Gliran? Although he's hardly 1st level any more...