MotW: Tempest question: 2H vs 2W, again!

[Orco42]

Nice reaper, nice.

 

[JLXC]

Well I will put it this way. TWF is NOT as good as other styles Precisely because it takes so many Feats and such. If you don't like it... don't TAKE IT. You want all that apparent "Coolness" factor? You are saying you don't want 2WF to be Monte like in 2E? Then shut up and take it. Talk about how cool you look and just DEAL. D&D is not SIMPLY about number crunching. If it IS to YOU then damn well put some house rules in YOUR game and stop trying to sell it to the world. In YOUR game maybe TWF is "da bomb"... in main rules it's just OK. How to fix TWF?

Allow full Str Bonus for the off hand. This makes TWF with all the Feats just a "little bit" better than using the Big Sword. It's really that simple. I've done that already in my game... no biggie. Nobody is upset, not the Great Axe guy, not the Mace and Shield Cleric and not the TWF Rogue.

Simple fix. Makes all the math go into the Favor of TWF.

 

[Crothian]

I don't think it's a matter of pure number crunchying, more of a curiosity. At least for me it is.

 

[Gaiden]

The answer to the original question, is all else being equal, the tempest that has no penalty to hit while wielding two weapons is better than the other warrior holding any weapon two handed.

The extra damage from str now is not statistically diminished.

Eg.

THF - base dmg for twohanded sword = 2d6, +1.5X for str +Y for other benefits.

TWF - base dmg for doublesword = (2x1d8, +1.5X for str +2xY for other benefits)

Consider 10th level tempest (20th level character): +20/+20/+15/+15/+10/+10/+5/+5

vs.

2hf
+20/+15/+10/+5

AC = Z

Assume statistical average for attack rolls

TWF

((10.5(avgd20 roll)+A (for benefits)+20 (for bab))-Z(for AC))(4.5+X+Y)+((10.5(avgd20 roll)+A (for benefits)+15 (for bab))-Z(for AC))(4.5+X+Y)+((10.5(avgd20 roll)+A (for benefits)+10 (for bab))-Z(for AC))(4.5+X+Y)+((10.5(avgd20 roll)+A (for benefits)+5 (for bab))-Z(for AC))(4.5+X+Y)+((10.5(avgd20 roll)+A (for benefits)+20 (for bab))-Z(for AC))(4.5+.5X+Y)+((10.5(avgd20 roll)+A (for benefits)+15 (for bab))-Z(for AC))(4.5+.5X+Y)+((10.5(avgd20 roll)+A (for benefits)+10 (for bab))-Z(for AC))(4.5+.5X+Y)+((10.5(avgd20 roll)+A (for benefits)+5 (for bab))-Z(for AC))(4.5+.5X+Y)

That = 828+36A+138X+6AX+184Y+8AY-(36Z+6ZX+8ZY)

Going through a similar process for 2hf yields

644+28A+138X+6AX+92Y+4AY-(28Z+6ZX+4ZY)

For simplification between comparisons, the 138X, 6AX and 6ZX can be eliminated from the equation. Therefore, if the second equation subtracted from the first yields a positive number twf is better.

184+8A+92Y+4AY-(8Z+4ZY) is our end result.

Remeber we are assuming all else is equal between the two except one is using two weapons and the other one.

Rearrange the following equation:

184+92Y+4(2A+AY)-4(2Z+ZY)

Obviously, if A=Z twf is better, alot better. Remember A is the benefit to hit and Z is the armor class (Y is always positive). Only when Z is 92 points higher than A is twoweapon fighting better.

WHen is that going to happen - practically never.

I haven't even included criticals in this calculation which will only further help twf.

 

[DrSpunj]

Hey!

The answer to the original question, is all else being equal, the tempest that has no penalty to hit while wielding two weapons is better than the other warrior holding any weapon two handed.

[snip]

184+92Y+4(2A+AY)-4(2Z+ZY)

Obviously, if A=Z twf is better, alot better. Remember A is the benefit to hit and Z is the armor class (Y is always positive). Only when Z is 92 points higher than A is twoweapon fighting better.

WHen is that going to happen - practically never.

I haven't even included criticals in this calculation which will only further help twf.

Thanks a lot! This is what I mean by "math wizard". My only question is whether in the 3rd sentence after "Obviously" you meant the following:

"Only when Z is 92 points higher than A is two handed fighting better."

Otherwise you seem to contradict yourself there at the end or I'm missing the boat on your concluding statements.

JLXC, while I really like your House Rule with regards 2WF and am glad to hear it hasn't upset the balance in your game, I can't say I really appreciate your small rant at the beginning of that post. Like Mal Malenkirk, reapersaurus and many others here it makes sense that if doing something costs a lot, you should be getting something worthwhile for it. This topics been beat to death and I'm not here to resurrect a dead horse, but with this new prestige class addressing one of the disadvantages of the style I was curious to see if the balanced was changed.

Thanks to all for the posts!

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

There are several "mathematics" way to compare the different styles. Here is mine:

I compute it another way then usual, I do not take into account multiple hits but think more about the probability of just one hit and the average damage due to this hit.

Let`s assume two 4th level Fighters.
They will be equal in everything expect two feats.
We will use only situations where you can use full attacks. (This is one of the greatest problems with all this comparing)
Fighter 1 chooses: Ambidexterity, Two Weapon Fighting
Weapons: Longsword, Shortsword.
Fighter 2 chooses: Weapon Focus (Longsword), Weapon Specialisation (Longsword)
no further differences.
We will ignore Strength bonus - at least for now. And we will ingore the greater probability of a critical hit when wielding two weapons - this might or might not be compensating each other.

Fighter 1 gets 2 attacks at his highes base attack (with a penalty of -2) This means he can roll 2 x D20. Allowing two rolls of a D20 is approximately equivalent to rolling 1d20 with a +10 bonus.
If we only "want" him to hit once, he as a +10 bonus, with an average damage of (average of a 1d8 + average of a 1d6)/2 = (4.5 + 3.5)/2 = 4.
His effective attack bonus is +8, not +10, since he loses 2 points due to fighting with two weapon (we still have to take this into account)

Fighter 2 uses his standard base attack without special penalties.
His average damage is 6.5 points with a +1 to attack.
To make math a bit easier, the +1 attack bonus can be converted to damage due to power attack, so average damage 7.5 with +0 to attack.
(Both Fighter should have been able to get power attack)

To make Fighter1 "damagewise" equal to Fighter 2, he could use power attack. Rounding Fighter 2´s damage up to 8, to make math easier. Power Attack +4 makes both fighters equal in damage, reducing Fighter 1s attack bonus from +8 to +4.

Regarding AC: A Large Shield grants Fighter 2 no penalties in battle. It gives him at least a +2 bonus to Armor Class, it might even be greater considering magic enhanced shields.
Expertise can be used to get Armor Class up for Fighter 1 (A Fighter level 4 has 3 bonus feats and 2 standard feats, so he could still afford this)
Thus, Fighter1 is better when the total AC Bonus from Fighter2`s shield is not greater than +3, equal to him when its bonus is +4, and worse when his bonus is greater than +4.
(His net advantage would be +4 - (Fighter2 Shield`s AC Bonus) )

Now we get a 3rd fighter (let`s call him Fighter 3), he wields a Greatsword (average damage 7 without special bonuses).
His "free" 2 feats are, obvious, weapon focus (Great Sword), Weapon Specialisation (Great Sword), giving him a +1 to attack and a +2 to damage, using power attack to reduce attack bonus to +0 he inflicts a total damge of 10 points.
Let us assume that you could subtract points from damage to raise your AC (this makes math much easier), he could add a total of +2 to his AC and subtratcing 2 from its Damage to be equal to fighter 2 using a Large Shield without bonuses.
(If we take into account that fighter3 get`s more strength bonus, he would be better than fighter2.)

To get fighter 1 to be as good in damage dealing as fighter3, he would have to bump up his average damage from 4 to 10. Using Power Attack (ingoring the maximum possiblity for it) he could add +6 to damage and reduce attack bonus by 6 to a total of 2.
In this case, fighter one has a 2 points advantage to fighter 3, which is equal to his advantage to fighter2 with a nonmagical large shield.

Still missing in this calculations:
a) Full consideration of strength bonus to damage
b) Any situation in which only one attack is allowed and extra attack from high Base Attack Bonus (whithout Improved Two Weapon Fighting: Advantage Fighter 2 & 3 and when moving and attacking: Figher 2 & 3).
c) Costs for weapons.
d) Special Feats especially from "non"core Books (Shield Expert can completely change balance when you use shields as offhand weapon, especially when using Shield Spikes, but there might still be other feats for one handed and two handed fighting styles; Twin Sword Style from Forgotten Realms)
e) Using Special Weapons, Weapon with Reachs, Double Weapon (especially considering Weapon Focus/Specialisation).
(Fighter 2get`s slightly better when using a Bastard Sword, but the same applies when Fighter 1 switches to Orc Double Axe or Double Sword)
f) Linked with the costs for weapons: Pentrating Damage Reduction (Fighter2 and Figher3 are more likely to get better enhancements for their single weapon)
g) Versatility (Switching Weapons especially with Weapon Focus/Specialisation; Fighters switching styles especially at high levels.)
h) Ability Requirements for feats (Fighter 2 & 3 will most likely not have a high Dexterity)
i) Differend classes: Rangers cannot use Double Weapons with ease. Barbarians cannot wear Heavy Armor and are more likely to get a high Dexterity, more easier qualifying for Ambidexterity, but lack some feats (can`t get Weapon Specialisation unless multiclassing) and so on...


So, all in one:
I believe, all styles are relatively equal, and it is really a question of what you prefer. There is no real "better" in here.

 

[Gyoza sausage bun]

sorry, accidental post

 

[Plane Sailing]

Another issue to consider when comparing the relative merits.

A 2H weapon gets its full whack on ever standard attack, every AoO, every charge attack.

A 2WF approach only gets its full whack when you get a Full Attack option. When you are taking AoO, spring attack, charge attacks etc. etc. you simply get to use your single 1H weapon.

In the course of an adventure this is another thing in favour of the 2H weapon user.

Interestingly it means that Quickdraw becomes a very useful feat for 2WF, because you can charge in using your longsword (or whatever) 2H, and then quickdraw your off-hand weapon as soon as you get a Full Attack opportunity. It works even better if your DM allows you to put a weapon away as a free action with Quickdraw too, but that might be pushing it a little

Cheers

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Well, as I stated - net bonus seems to be +2 for two weapon fighting under optimal (full attack) situations.
This advantage is lost in any circumstances where he cannot use his full attack. He loses at least this +2 net bonus, perhaps/probably more, since two of his feats are no longer applicable.
His losses are lower when he uses a Shield (or Shield Spikes) as offhand weapon (with or without Shield Expert) (Not using Shield as weapon means Armor Bonus from Shield).
Well, all styles have advantages and disadvantages, but I believe I already told (wrote) .

 

[poop]

It is a measure of the balance of the two styles that no one can ever pinpoint a "best".