Two new weapons, and a feat.

[Ragnar Rocker]

Ok, here goes:


Tulwar, medium exotic weapon

Damage Critical Weight Type
1d8 19-20/x3 10 lb. Slashing


Heavy Warhammer, medium exotic weapon

Damage Critical Weight Type
1d10 20/x3 12 lb. Bludgeoning


Basically the idea for the tulwar is of a kukri type sword. A curved chopping weapon with the edge on the inside. The heavy warhammer is just intended to be the bludgeoning equivalent to the dwarven waraxe and bastard sword. The crit for the tulwar is a little unusual, but doesn't break any rules so far as i can tell.



Now the feat:

Advanced Two-Weapon Fighting
You are skilled in using two weapons of similar size.
Prerequisites
Two-weapon fighting, ambidexterity, expertise, BAB +6 or higher.
Benefit
You may use a weapon in each hand equal to your size. When fighting in this way, your off-hand weapon is considered light for determining attack penalties.



I think i'm happy with these now.

 

[Crothian]

I'd find an additional feat for the Advanced Two-Weapon Fighting prerequsites. Any 2-weapon fighter will have the feats you require and there really is no any reason for them to not take this feat.

The feat prerequite should reflect how you think this feat works. If it's with addition skill in the weapon you might want weapon focus. If it's from pure strnegth you might want power attack. If it's from learning a technique Expertise would fit.

 

[trentonjoe]

Ok, here goes:


Tulwar, medium exotic weapon

Damage Critical Weight Type
1d8 19-20/x3 10 lb. Slashing


[

There ya go, whaddaya'll think?

This is better than the 2bladed sword. SMaller size and better crit multplier. I'd make it atleast 1,000 gp.

I think it is to good though.

 

[drowdude]

Both weapons look fine to me.


The feat is iffy. Especially if you allow Tempests from MotW in your campaign.

 

[Ace32]

Oriental Adventures lists the Tulwar as being identical to the Scimitar.

 

[The Souljourner]

Weapons are fine (basically just extrapolating from known exotics), feat definitely needs a prerequisite not already required by the normal progression. You could use weapon focus and narrow the ability so it only applied when you use a weapon you have weapon focus in. That would definitely power down the ability some, which I don't think would be a bad idea.

I think I like the suggestion for expertise as a requirement though. Then you're requiring a feat that otherwise the character wouldn't take, but it's still a useful feat.

With an extra feat tacked on, it's probably fine.

-Nate aka The Souljourner

 

[Ragnar Rocker]

Well, i've never read OA or MotW, so i don't know about the tulwar and the tempest.

As for the feat, i suppose there is no reason not to take it if you've already advanced up the TWF feat chain and would like to burn a feat to use a d8 or even a d10 weapon instead of a d6 weapon in your offhand. Expertise as an added prereq isn't a bad idea though.

 

[Baron Von StarBlade]

You also might want to put in a size limitation. Otherwise by burning a feat on Monkey Grip (Sword and Fist) you could be wielding 2 Great Axes. . 2 Great Swords. . etc.

I would considering rewording the feat description to say the off-hand weapon is considered 1 size catagory smaller than normal.

I do also agree with the need for a non-TWF restriction in the chain. Expertise is good, or possibly a Str 15+ would work also.

Otherwise it looks pretty good.

 

[Ragnar Rocker]

Thanks for the constructive input everybody. I'm pretty pleased with the final result, but i'll still consider any further comments.

 

[Steven McRownt]

The weapons looks fine, but i should say that Advance TWF needs wapon focus on the wapons you want to use... Just a consideration...

Steven McRownt