D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] TWF + rogue = overpowered?

[Hypersmurf]

If you're talking about a half-orc, then the Barb will be level 6 before he can finally use his weapon effectively as it was meant to be used. Now, he can do the same thing at level 3.

Level 1, isn't it? Aren't half-orcs supposed to be getting Racial Familiarity with the double axe?

One feat is all he needs...

-Hyp.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Level 1, isn't it? Aren't half-orcs supposed to be getting Racial Familiarity with the double axe?

One feat is all he needs...

-Hyp.

I heard the halfs get jack.

 

[Zaruthustran]

The whip is primarily there for area-control (tripping people who charge you while they're still 15ft out, or disarming opponents that have reach)

Just a note, the whip is useless vs. a charging opponent. It doesn't have reach; a charging opponent does not provoke an AoO. So, you can't "trip people who charge you while they're still 15ft out".

Now, if you had the Hold the Line feat (gives you an AoO vs. anyone who charges you) I guess you could try to argue that you get to make that AoO with your ranged weapon (whip) at 15' instead of with a melee weapon at 5'. But you'd have to argue.

Disarming might be difficult since most reach weapons are Large two handed weapons and your whip is a Small one-handed weapon. That's a +12 bonus in favor of the Reach weapon wielder (+4 per size category, +4 for two hands). Even adjusted to +10 since your whip gives a disarm bonus, that's still a huge number to overcome on an opposed attack roll.

-z

 

[Hypersmurf]

Now, if you had the Hold the Line feat (gives you an AoO vs. anyone who charges you) I guess you could try to argue that you get to make that AoO with your ranged weapon (whip) at 15' instead of with a melee weapon at 5'. But you'd have to argue.

Unless you're a Lasher, your whip doesn't threaten. If you're a Lasher, it threatens 5'.

No 15' Trips without a Readied action.

-Hyp.

 

[Corinth]

TWF+Shield Expert=Nasty Sword & Board Fighter.

My next dwarf fighter will go this route, and he's use a dwarven waraxe as his primary weapon.

 

[Petrosian]

the difference is ... one less feat to spend on it... one more feat to spend elsewhere.

is one feat over a character;s life going to be broken?

hmmmm...

humans get one feat more...

nope.. i don't think it will be broken.

 

[Darklone]

I don't think it will be broken either. Rogues in my games suffer enough from not hitting anything, one more attack with lesser chances to hit for the others won't kill me

 

[Ranger REG]

Well, if you guys have problem with the new 3.5e TWF feat, then why not just house-rule it and add one more prerequisite: BAB +1 or higher.

That way, a 1st-level rogue can't get it.

 

[Kalshane]

While I'm sure it'll cause a lot more rogues to take it, I personally found the Spring Attack route a lot more effective for my rogue. With a Con of 10, he just didn't have the HP to stand toe to toe with an enemy and full-attack, so TWF would have been fairly useless to him even with the smaller cost. Much easier to circle around to the flank, dash in, strike once and then dash away.

 

[Darklone]

Yeah, Kalshane, I am more worried about my dwarven fighter rogues with Con 20 if worried at all .