Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Some Two Weapon Fighting and Thrown Weapon Feats
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Rahkan" data-source="post: 705674" data-attributes="member: 3583"><p><strong>Re: what i think</strong></p><p></p><p>Well-Placed Strike - I'm quizzical about objections to this one. In my view it just puts the dex-fighter on par with the strength-fighter. The former can use dex as a bonus to damage and attack at the cost of two feats (Well-Placed Strike and Weapon Finesse), while gaining high armor class with dex. The latter can use strength for high attack and damage and cover up his armor class deficiencies with armor, while at the cost of the penalties for wearing heavy armor. It seems like, considering that Weapon Finesse only applies to the worse of weapons, the Dex Fighter is still on the bottom even with this feat.</p><p></p><p>I like the idea of two as one being useable for a combination of weapons. I'll edit the original post for this as soon as possible</p><p></p><p>I'm working on a throwing weapons prestige class. I'll post it here soon. Now on the bulk of my post.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I have a feeling this might be too powerful, since then one could gain the benefits of these feats, which are limited to a specific weapon for balance reasons, to any weapon including all the really neat exotic ones that or any sword...etc, as long as one was also using a weapon, again any weapon, in the off-hand. Then there is also the question of stacking, since a bonus could concievably be gained both for a regular weapon focus, and because one possesses the weapon focus (two-weapon fighting) feat. This issue is of course not addressed either by myself or you. I guess I thought my version might be balanced because the off-hand attack is A. Inherently less powerful than the primary hand, B. typically for a light (and thus weaker) weapon.</p><p></p><p>I see no problem with the issue of doing this for Throwing Weapons since the latter seem to be both much weaker than melee weapons and generally equivalent with each other. In fact this is basically what Throwing Weapons Mastery does, only at the cost of a feat.</p><p></p><p>As for Quickly Slashing, It is there to address the fact that a two-weapon fighter is much weaker, as one of those spring attacking types, than a person wielding a greatsword. The person with the greatsword has a weapon that does the same base damage as the sum of the base damage of two short swords (2d6) plus 1.5 times the strength modifer with each hit and can be used in situations where the character only gets one attack. However, a dual wielder in these situations makes one longsword attack (at best) at -2, and does only 1d8 + 1 times the strength modifer.</p><p></p><p>The only conclusion to be drawn from this is that a fighter who prefers to spring attack and run around and dart in and out for damage is much better off wielding a greatsword than two of any weapon. However if he wants to stand in one place and hack people down he should use the two-weapons since in those cases the fact that he gets two attack rolls, greater chance of a critical and that his weapon specialization, etc, bonuses apply twice makes an extra attack more beneficial. </p><p></p><p>Still, allowing two attacks to be used in these places is undeniably a power-up, since it makes the two-weapon fighter more powerful in all situations than a greatsword wielder. Even remembering that it is a mid-level feat that even a pure fighter can only get by level 9. I would prefer not to split it up, since it makes it harder for rangers to take the feat (the quintessential dual wielders), how about balancing it with penalties to hit instead? (bearing in mind that they still have the -2 two-weapon penalty that can never be erased.</p><p></p><p>Ed- Edited for a silly mistake</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Rahkan, post: 705674, member: 3583"] [b]Re: what i think[/b] Well-Placed Strike - I'm quizzical about objections to this one. In my view it just puts the dex-fighter on par with the strength-fighter. The former can use dex as a bonus to damage and attack at the cost of two feats (Well-Placed Strike and Weapon Finesse), while gaining high armor class with dex. The latter can use strength for high attack and damage and cover up his armor class deficiencies with armor, while at the cost of the penalties for wearing heavy armor. It seems like, considering that Weapon Finesse only applies to the worse of weapons, the Dex Fighter is still on the bottom even with this feat. I like the idea of two as one being useable for a combination of weapons. I'll edit the original post for this as soon as possible I'm working on a throwing weapons prestige class. I'll post it here soon. Now on the bulk of my post. I have a feeling this might be too powerful, since then one could gain the benefits of these feats, which are limited to a specific weapon for balance reasons, to any weapon including all the really neat exotic ones that or any sword...etc, as long as one was also using a weapon, again any weapon, in the off-hand. Then there is also the question of stacking, since a bonus could concievably be gained both for a regular weapon focus, and because one possesses the weapon focus (two-weapon fighting) feat. This issue is of course not addressed either by myself or you. I guess I thought my version might be balanced because the off-hand attack is A. Inherently less powerful than the primary hand, B. typically for a light (and thus weaker) weapon. I see no problem with the issue of doing this for Throwing Weapons since the latter seem to be both much weaker than melee weapons and generally equivalent with each other. In fact this is basically what Throwing Weapons Mastery does, only at the cost of a feat. As for Quickly Slashing, It is there to address the fact that a two-weapon fighter is much weaker, as one of those spring attacking types, than a person wielding a greatsword. The person with the greatsword has a weapon that does the same base damage as the sum of the base damage of two short swords (2d6) plus 1.5 times the strength modifer with each hit and can be used in situations where the character only gets one attack. However, a dual wielder in these situations makes one longsword attack (at best) at -2, and does only 1d8 + 1 times the strength modifer. The only conclusion to be drawn from this is that a fighter who prefers to spring attack and run around and dart in and out for damage is much better off wielding a greatsword than two of any weapon. However if he wants to stand in one place and hack people down he should use the two-weapons since in those cases the fact that he gets two attack rolls, greater chance of a critical and that his weapon specialization, etc, bonuses apply twice makes an extra attack more beneficial. Still, allowing two attacks to be used in these places is undeniably a power-up, since it makes the two-weapon fighter more powerful in all situations than a greatsword wielder. Even remembering that it is a mid-level feat that even a pure fighter can only get by level 9. I would prefer not to split it up, since it makes it harder for rangers to take the feat (the quintessential dual wielders), how about balancing it with penalties to hit instead? (bearing in mind that they still have the -2 two-weapon penalty that can never be erased. Ed- Edited for a silly mistake [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Some Two Weapon Fighting and Thrown Weapon Feats
Top