D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] No good reason to get rid of Ambidexterity...

[Gaiden]

There is only one case I know of where you might mechanically* want ambidexterity without TWF:

Iaijutsu master with expert tactician using the flavor text of iaijutsu. In that case (and in real life) it is only the attack made from the unsheathing that benefits from the extra power of iaijutsu, not any random additional attack that occurs in the same round (which by the rules would include AoO).

*edit

 

[kreynolds]

What the hell was Andy thinking?

That as a feat, Ambidexterity sucked.

That D&D players couldn't do math?

See previous answer.

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

So if you have a fighter with an 18 dex and a 14 str, which route is better?

If you have a fighter with an 18 str and a 14 dex, which route is better?

The fact is that what your solution does is benefit strong people more than it benefits weak people, which is not how it should be.

You just answered your own question. The stronger guy does not benefit from Two-Weapon Fighting, lacking the entry level prerequisite Dexterity score. The weaker guy qualifies for all but the most advanced version of Two-Weapon Fighting, shy of only 1 point of Dexterity.

And if you don't think -10 on an attack is a big deal at level 20, you haven't been playing many games at high level. +20 BAB + 5 from a weapon +10 from a 30str and -10 is still a 25% penalty. That's huge.

But your bonuses at that level are also huge, usually above and beyond anything you need to hit. Again, you virtually answered your own question here. I've also moved on from this point. The more I reply to people about it, the more I get accused of being a troll. Go figure.



Suggesting that revisions are needed for a newly revised game (that most people here just shelled out $90 to buy) doesn't make one popular.

Originally posted by kreynolds
That as a feat, Ambidexterity sucked.

Which is why the bonus should be changed but the function should be kept. In case you haven't brought yourself up to date, my current thinking (across recent posts) is that Ambidexterity should negate the off-hand damage penalty and allow character to switch handedness at their leisure.

 

[Hypersmurf]

No. Technically that only grants +4 worth of combat bonuses. You are still using the same weapon. Just because you were smart enough to the same weapon in your offhand does not double up the bonuses. Both weapons still only receive a +4 bonus above their untrained usage.

Um, so how can you call TWF a +8 bonus? The primary weapon receives a +2 and the off-weapon receives a +6.

If +4 to each hand isn't +8, then neither is +2/+6...

-Hyp.

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

Um, so how can you call TWF a +8 bonus? The primary weapon receives a +2 and the off-weapon receives a +6.

If +4 to each hand isn't +8, then neither is +2/+6...

The point is that the new Two-Weapon Fighting feat also grants those bonuses to two *different* weapons for a total of +8 worth of combat bonuses. Can we move on now? I know I have.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The point is that the new Two-Weapon Fighting feat also grants those bonuses to two *different* weapons for a total of +8 worth of combat bonuses.

What sort of point is that, and how is it at all relevant?

If I'm a character using two shortswords, then adding "bonuses" across both hands, MWP gives the same total "bonus" as TWF.

Why is it at all important that TWF can apply to different weapons? You're complaining about the numerical effect being overpowered. The numerical effects of the two feats are identical.

If you're concerned about damage dice of shortswords, then swap MWP: Shortsword for EWP: Double Sword. I don't care. Either way, the sum of the penalty remissions across both hands is the same for a weapon proficiency feat and for the TWF feat.

-Hyp.

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

What sort of point is that, and how is it at all relevant?

It's entirely relevant. One proficient weapon, even when two are used in both hands, represent a single combat bonus of +4 (compared to when they are used untrained), not +8. This works in the same way that a character wielding two short swords with Weapon Focus (shortsword) is not receiving a +2 attack bonus for the feat, but a +1 attack bonus, calculated individually (the key). You certainly can't bring a double sword into the equation (although no different) because that requires a whole other feat. And the point here is economy of feats.

But you have long since fallen a field of the original point with your pursuit of this issue.

The combat penalty for two weapon fighting is currently -6/-10. Just *one* feat reduces that penalty to -4/-4. If a character is using two different weapons, which is very likely in order to maximize damage (a medium weapon in the primary hand and light weapon in the secondary hand) then the combat bonus of this *one* feat equates to +8 worth of combat bonuses, which is unbalanced and unprecedented.

By now you know my preferred solution to this problem (unless you have remained completely oblivious to the other conversations of this thread).

 

[hong]

It's entirely relevant. One proficient weapon, even when two are used in both hands, represent a single combat bonus of +4 (compared to when they are used untrained), not +8. This works in the same way that a character wielding two short swords with Weapon Focus (shortsword) is not receiving a +2 attack bonus for the feat, but a +1 attack bonus, calculated individually (the key).

A character using two shortswords is certainly receiving an effective +2 bonus from WF (shortsword). If you're a TWF guy, you're better off using two weapons of the same type, as opposed to two different weapons, for exactly this reason.

Cut the waffle and cease your silliness, because that's MY schtick.

 

[Darklone]

Cut the waffle and cease your silliness, because that's MY schtick.

Yeah, but you are at least funny, hong.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I think I post my opinions about the matter, before I start an excessive fire spell casting.

I think it's good that they combined TWF and Ambidexterity into one feat. It was exceedingly rare that anyone took only one of these feats, those that don't need the two-weapon fighting part can just ignore it, and if you do lose one hand, the DM will surely overcome the usual penalties to fight with the off-hand overtime (so now your other hand is your main hand). Plus this only occurs in gritty scenarios, where you don't have access to a cleric that casts regenerate on you, and in normal combat you don't use limbs in D&D.

Plus it makes it easier, for we don't have as many different options when fighting with two hands.

That whole "this feat gives me +x to hit" is something The King of the Golden Harry would gladly take away for a small fee. The feat doesn't grant you any bonus, it lessens a penalty. While both a lessened penalty and a bonus will increase your total attack bonus under the usual circumstances, only the bonus will allow you to actually get over the normal maximum. With Weapon Focus (gives a bonus) you will be able to inflict BAB + Ability Modifier + Weapon Bonus +1. With Weapon Proficiency you will be able to inflict BAB + Ability Modifier + Weapon Bonus. Which is the same as anyone who is "inherently" (cause it's a natural weapon or cause his class gives him automatic proficiency) proficient with the weapon.

Plus, Standard penalties for fighting with two weapons are -6/-10, while TWF grants you -4/-4. The "net gain" is +2/+4. If you add it all up, you'll have +6. A wizard who takes Simple Weapons Proficiency and uses two different simple weapons at once he wasn't proficient with before (say, a heavy mace and a light mace), will have +0/+0 with these weapons (not considering two-weapon fighting), while before he hat -4/-4. The "net gain" is +4/+4. If you add it all up, you'll have +8. Gosh! A plus 8 attack bonus, AND it can be used with two different weapons, you aren't fixed on one weapon. That's EVEN MORE than two weapon's fightings "bonuses". OMG! SIMPLE WEAPONS PROFICIENCY IS SO BROKEN. WIZARDS ARE THE NEW MELEE MONSTERS!

This sounds like BS too, but at least the numbers are right. In fact, though, it doesn't hold any water (a fate which is shared with your "TWF gives me +8 on my attacks" conspiracy theory, with the difference that I'm actually aware - or willing to admit - that what I say doesn't make any sense to a sober person).


The second thing, a feat - whatever we call it - that gives you the full strength-bonus to your off-hand attack, is broken, on the other hand. It would mean that you get more out of your strenght with those two wee weapons than the heavy weapon guy gets out of his big, mighty instrument of destruction (tm). You'd get 2x strenght, while he only got 1.5.