2 weapon fighting

[Inconsequenti-AL]

A house rule I was considering:

2 weapon fighters can make 1 attack with each of their weapons as a standard action, charge, attack of opportunity or any situation where they'd normally only get a single attack.

Makes some sense to me. Would seem to give them a nice boost... And make it a more useful style for rogues, or anyone with +XDY damage types.

Would it be too much? Have I thought this through properly?


I still think it's 'weaker' than a power attacking 2 weapon fighter, but that's another whole issue altogether!

 

[glass]

The trouble is, TWF is already very much better for sneak attackers than anyone else, which is why it is so difficult to balance.

Your houserule would also solve the incompatability between TWF and Spring Attack, which makes all kinds of sense from a flavour point of view, but leads to further balance issues.

Sorry I couldn't be more supportive, but the term 'can-of-worms' springs to mind



glass.

 

[Vraister]

Without a feat I think its to strong, because you always get two attacks which can be quite devastating with extra damage.

Vraister

 

[Darklone]

It's nearly ok if you play WoT or other settings with less sneak attack dudes, see above.

Perhaps I'd ask for a -4 to all attacks instead of -2 though.

 

[Inconsequenti-AL]

I do kind of agree about the strength of it for the sneak attackers... especially combined with spring attack.

Vraister - feat seems like a natural for this one...

Twin Strike
Preq: BAB +1, 2 weapon fighting.
Special: can make 1 attack with each of their weapons as a standard action, charge, attack of opportunity or any situation where they'd normally only get a single attack.
Normal: Don't do that!

I guess it could be balanced further by increasing the Preq's - higher BAB would mean it arrived later for rogue types - perhaps even +11 or better? - by that level, it would perhaps have less impact?

Although that would mean it's unlikely to be seen until later in the game.

 

[sledged]

2 weapon fighters can make 1 attack with each of their weapons as a standard action, charge, attack of opportunity or any situation where they'd normally only get a single attack.

I wouldn't have a problem with it. But you might want to take into consideration that if you let a fighter get two attacks in a standard action, then you'd have to allow monsters with two or more natural weaponry to get one natural attack for each natural weapon they possess. Your players might suffer more than benefit from this rule.

 

[index]

Why?

Inconsequenti-AL wrote:

A house rule I was considering:

2 weapon fighters can make 1 attack with each of their weapons as a standard action, charge, attack of opportunity or any situation where they'd normally only get a single attack.

Why?

Have you ever done any sparring with weapons? Even just SCA-style padded sticks? It's DIFFICULT to get extra useful attacks with a second weapon. Mostly what a second weapon does is make life slightly more difficult for flankers and leave less openings for attackers to exploit.

The only time I'm gotten useful extra attacks in real life from a second weapon was using two paintball pistols.

[....]

Would it be too much? Have I thought this through properly?

Sorry, but yes, it'd be too much.

I still think it's 'weaker' than a power attacking 2 weapon fighter, but that's another whole issue altogether!

Orthogonal. Your proposal would not interfere with Power Attack and vice versa. Both could be used together.

Note that some creatures (lions, for example) have a special ability called Pounce that allows them to use a full attack at the end of a charge instead of a single attack. Most creatures do not have this ability.

I'd allow a person with two weapons to attack once with both as a substitute for a coup de grace, with all the penalties and limitations of a coup de grace. I'd allow a person with two weapons to attack once with both as a standard action when dropping out of a tree on a flat-footed person, with either weapon at an additional -4.

Also, check the descriptions of crossbows in the equipment chapter. You can fire two loaded crossbows using the penalties for two weapon fighting, but there is nothing (that I can find) saying it takes a full attack to do so.

I don't think I'd allow it in any other conditions.

--index

 

[LicheHazel]

Inconsequenti-AL wrote:


Why?

Have you ever done any sparring with weapons? Even just SCA-style padded sticks? It's DIFFICULT to get extra useful attacks with a second weapon. Mostly what a second weapon does is make life slightly more difficult for flankers and leave less openings for attackers to exploit.

Yes I have and UK LRP weapons, as long as your in light armor it can be quite effective, the Issue here is more down to improved offhand fighting, remember that two weapon fighting is usefull for Rogues etc, but what about in the hands of a mage? Ritual battles etc, we use a rule that allows for this, but it does require combat matrixes. hope that makes sense. Also with two weap fighting, dual Strike leaves an opening for retaliation.... As your reference to the SCA padded sticks drum roll stabbing doesn't work.

Hope this is either a help or hinderance

 

[reanjr]

A house rule I was considering:

2 weapon fighters can make 1 attack with each of their weapons as a standard action, charge, attack of opportunity or any situation where they'd normally only get a single attack.

Makes some sense to me. Would seem to give them a nice boost... And make it a more useful style for rogues, or anyone with +XDY damage types.

Would it be too much? Have I thought this through properly?


I still think it's 'weaker' than a power attacking 2 weapon fighter, but that's another whole issue altogether!

Two things: The attacks have to be on the same target and only one is treated as accurate and therefore eligible to sneak attack, etc. Other than that, I think it could work.

 

[reanjr]

Have you ever done any sparring with weapons? Even just SCA-style padded sticks? It's DIFFICULT to get extra useful attacks with a second weapon. Mostly what a second weapon does is make life slightly more difficult for flankers and leave less openings for attackers to exploit.

Yeah, I really think they messed up when they rolled ambidexterity into two-weapon fighting. I think it was good enough on its own. Perhaps if people didn't think it was powerful enough, they could have rolled greater two-weapon fighting into tow-weapon fighting instead. That would have made more sense.