2-H weapon + armor spikes + TWF = ?

[evilbob]

Could you wield a greatsword, gaining your 2-handed weapon bonus, AND use armor spikes as an off-handed weapon? Could you combine this with TWF to take only a -2 to both attacks?

Armor spikes are a light weapon you can use as an off-handed attack. The main question is whether or not you can apply the 1.5x strength bonus to your 2-handed weapon and then apply a .5x strength bonus to the armor spikes, or if you'd have to use only a 1x strength bonus for the 2-H one. Since strength bonuses are talked about in terms of weapon types, it seems to be within the rules.

 

[Khairn]

I don't have the PHB in front of me, but I'm pretty certain that it indicates when fighting with 2 wpns that your "on-hand" gets +str on dmg and your "off-hand" gets + 1/2 Str on dmg.

 

[evilbob]

The relevant section talking about weapons is in the SRD here.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I think it is 1.5x and 0.5x, the same as a character weilding a greatsword who also has a bite attack. Well, that's secondary natural weapon, but for the purposes of strength bonus, same thing. You could also do this with Improved Unarmed Stike (attacking with feet, headbutt, elbows, etc...) instead of armor spikes, if you felt like blowing a feat or dipping monk.

 

[moritheil]

I don't see why not. The relevant concern is that you're taking 4 damage off your greatsword attack for a second attack of questionable merit.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I don't see why not. The relevant concern is that you're taking 4 damage off your greatsword attack for a second attack of questionable merit.

8 with Leap Attack!

 

[evilbob]

The relevant concern is that you're taking 4 damage off your greatsword attack for a second attack of questionable merit.

I'm not sure I follow this. The only penalty - assuming one had the TWF feat - would be a -2 to the 2-H attack(s). You're taking a -2 to your main attacks to get another attack at the same BAB that's almost as good as a short sword (1d6, x2).

In other words, a level 6 fighter (+6/+1) with an 18 strength (+4), a plain greatsword, TWF (no other feats), and armor spikes could full attack as such:

1: greatsword +8 melee (2d6 + 6)
2: armor spikes +8 melee (1d6 + 2)
3: greatsword +3 melee (2d6 + 6)


Edit: Unless you were saying "4 damage" in reference to a 2-handed power attack - meaning, losing two to your attack for 4 power attack damage. If that's the case, I'd think whether or not it is worth it depends on whether or not 1d6 + 1/2 your str is significantly greater than 4.

So using the same above example, is that better than:

1: greatsword PA for 2; +8 meleee (2d6 + 10)
1: greatsword PA for 2; +3 meleee (2d6 + 10)

 

[moritheil]

Edit: Unless you were saying "4 damage" in reference to a 2-handed power attack - meaning, losing two to your attack for 4 power attack damage. If that's the case, I'd think whether or not it is worth it depends on whether or not 1d6 + 1/2 your str is significantly greater than 4.

Yes. It's fair to assume that you have substantial strength if you are using a greatsword in the first place. However, what you are forgetting is that the second attack may be less likely to hit or less likely to penetrate DR. This is situational but at certain levels it is a pretty common occurrence, and I think it fair to mention it as DR is a classic problem with TWF.

Power Attack is also the tradeoff Stream of the Sky referred to in his post following mine.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Well, there are other issues, too. On the one hand, TWF is giving you an extra chance to do something, in case you miss the first roll. On the other hand, any comparison of "1d6 + 0.5 str vs. bonus from PA" requires you to actually hit with both attacks, statistically not particularly likely, in order to even work. Another cost of deciding to go with greatsword + armor spikes vs. just greatsword is the costs. You'll be expending more feats for TWF, and you'll be spending money to upgrade a second weapon, which can get expensive.

 

[evilbob]

DR is certainly a possible issue, although "4" is not going to make or break serious DR and being able to spread your damage around can actually be even more beneficial (less "overkill:" where you do 30 damage to finish something with 5 HP). But I think it ends up being not worth it just for the feat and dex cost associated with TWF (improved, greater). Even if your str is extremely high - say, 28 - you're still only adding 1d6 + 4, and having to take 3 feats and constantly pump points into dex just to keep up with your iterative attacks is a very high price to pay and doesn't seem justified for 3-4 average damage more.

So it looks like this is a valid tactic that seems useful but really isn't.