Rangers and 2 diff [w] - martial power confusion

[Doctor Proctor]

You can use either weapon with these powers. Usuallly you'll want to use your main one, but it might matter. For instance, if your dagger is flaming and you're fighting something that's vulnerable to fire.

That's true. It doesn't explicitly say it has to be the main hand weapon. Most of the time you would probably want to, but as you pointed out there might be times where it's advantageous to actually use the "weaker" weapon in your off-hand due to a special feature.

 

[Milambus]

Spiked Shield as your off-hand weapon seems pretty powerful. It is a weapon, but gives you the +1 AC/Ref from a shield. All you need to do is spend a feat to use it.

 

[James McMurray]

It's not a very good weapon though. It's got the same to-hit and damage as a club, and it only counts as a light shield. It's not horrible, but there are better choices for most character: heavy shield, good off-hand weapon (possibly defensive), or a big weapon for rangers.

At least you can't enhance your +5 shield with +4 Shield Spikes of Defending anymore.

 

[Doctor Proctor]

Spiked Shield as your off-hand weapon seems pretty powerful. It is a weapon, but gives you the +1 AC/Ref from a shield. All you need to do is spend a feat to use it.

Actually, it would be two feats. Rangers are not proficient with shields, and you would need both the shield and the weapon proficiency to get it's full use. If you didn't have the shield proficiency, then you would only be getting the attack abilities. p214-215 says that if you're not proficient with a shield you gain neither the AC nor the Reflex defense bonus. I'm guessing this was probably there specifically to leave it open to add shield weapons.

Now, for a Flurry Fighter? That might be a good way to go. They would have the shield proficiency, they would only need the weapon one. Plus, they have to use off-hand weapons anyway.

 

[boolean]

Actually, it would be two feats. Rangers are not proficient with shields, and you would need both the shield and the weapon proficiency to get it's full use. If you didn't have the shield proficiency, then you would only be getting the attack abilities. p214-215 says that if you're not proficient with a shield you gain neither the AC nor the Reflex defense bonus. I'm guessing this was probably there specifically to leave it open to add shield weapons.

Even worse, the bonus doesn't stack with the bonus from two-weapon-defense. So, you could spend two feats for shield proficiency (light) and weapon proficiency (spiked shield), getting +1 to AC and REF and a +2/1d6 off-hand light blade , or you could take the 2WF feats and get +1 to AC and REF and +1 to damage with your primary, while using a short sword as your secondary (+3/1d6 light blade).

 

[Saeviomagy]

Dire wolverine strike is that one that actually rewards using a two-hander and your unarmed strike, isn't it?

 

[Doctor Proctor]

Even worse, the bonus doesn't stack with the bonus from two-weapon-defense. So, you could spend two feats for shield proficiency (light) and weapon proficiency (spiked shield), getting +1 to AC and REF and a +2/1d6 off-hand light blade , or you could take the 2WF feats and get +1 to AC and REF and +1 to damage with your primary, while using a short sword as your secondary (+3/1d6 light blade).

Yeah, you're right. TWD says that it's a "Shield bonus", which is what the AC/Ref bonus on a shield is referred to as. So yeah, this wouldn't be a great route for a Ranger. They'd be blowing two feats just to get the weapon, and then another feat for TWF, as opposed to taking TWD and TWF and a weapon they're proficient in. So you save a feat by using something else.

However, for a Flurry Fighter, or MC Ranger/Fighter, a Spiked Shield still has some uses. Since it still counts as a shield you can eventually get Shield Specialization, and it would work with any of the Fighter powers that key off a shield, like Tide of Iron. Combine it with a Spear as your main hand weapons and Spear Push and you'll be pushing guys all over the place while still getting Flurry attacks. I'll have to remember this...

 

[77IM]

Dire wolverine strike is that one that actually rewards using a two-hander and your unarmed strike, isn't it?

I don't think that will work. Dire wolverine strike says something like "Requirement: You must be wielding two weapons to use this power." I don't see anything to support the notion that someone wielding a two-handed weapon can be considered to fulfill this requirement by virtue of their feet.

-- 77IM

 

[Doctor Proctor]

I don't think that will work. Dire wolverine strike says something like "Requirement: You must be wielding two weapons to use this power." I don't see anything to support the notion that someone wielding a two-handed weapon can be considered to fulfill this requirement by virtue of their feet.

-- 77IM

Yeah, that definitely wouldn't work. Dire Wolverine Strike is one of the "proper" TWF powers in that it specifies that the PC must be wielding two melee weapons. A Tempest Fighter could MC and use them, since he also wields two weapons, but that's about it. Someone using a two-hander and then an unarmed attack isn't wielding two weapons, they're just capable of making two attacks.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Yeah, that definitely wouldn't work. Dire Wolverine Strike is one of the "proper" TWF powers in that it specifies that the PC must be wielding two melee weapons. A Tempest Fighter could MC and use them, since he also wields two weapons, but that's about it. Someone using a two-hander and then an unarmed attack isn't wielding two weapons, they're just capable of making two attacks.

Sure dire wolverine strike says you have to be wielding two weapons - but I've seen many people agree that you're always armed with an unarmed strike, regardless of what's in your hands. In all the ranger powers, this is the only one that lets you ignore your offhand entirely: most of them require you to alternate between weapons or some such thing.

I don't see how your tempest fighter comment makes any sense at all...