Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
Ambidexterity in 3.5
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RandomPrecision" data-source="post: 2093671" data-attributes="member: 29267"><p>Because people who are ambidextrous don't have an off-hand. That's what the feat should give players.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But, the fighter could potentially use an ambidexterity feat that eliminates the off-hand penalty to increase his 2-handed damage.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't know about that - to get full bonuses to attack, a TWF usually uses two light weapons. If you're saying that the TWF fighter with TWF, ITWF, Ambidexterity, Weapon Focus in the applicable weapons, Weapon Specialization in the applicable weapons, and enchantments that add additional damage are more powerful than a fighter with none of the above, I'd have to agree with you. I don't feel that two-weapon fighters are unbalanced because of it. We're talking about 5 feats for that to come into play, so the character with these benefits would have to be either near-epic or a ranger who receives the feats for free when not using medium/heavy armor. A fighter with heavy armor and a vast plethora of feats can certainly compete with a dual-wielder.</p><p></p><p>I think we also have to look at it from a logical perspective. If there is an ambidexterity feat (and there should be, if nothing else, for role-playing reasons), then characters who have it cannot logically have an off-hand, and therefore, neither hand should be penalized. For that matter, maybe ambidexterity shouldn't be as much a feat as it is an option - typical right-handed characters have 1x STR on their right hands and .5 STR on their left hands, left-handed characters have the opposite, and ambidextrous characters have .75 STR on both hands. It doesn't entirely seem reasonable that they are weaker than other characters in this manner, but this actually seems more acceptable than making ambidextrous have off-hands despite the feat.</p><p></p><p>Perhaps as another method of balancing, ambidexterity might instead give equal dexterity modifiers to each hand. Therefore, to receive the benefits of ambidexterity, the player would have to take the weapon finesse feat and use an applicable weapon to have a full effective strength modifier.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RandomPrecision, post: 2093671, member: 29267"] Because people who are ambidextrous don't have an off-hand. That's what the feat should give players. But, the fighter could potentially use an ambidexterity feat that eliminates the off-hand penalty to increase his 2-handed damage. I don't know about that - to get full bonuses to attack, a TWF usually uses two light weapons. If you're saying that the TWF fighter with TWF, ITWF, Ambidexterity, Weapon Focus in the applicable weapons, Weapon Specialization in the applicable weapons, and enchantments that add additional damage are more powerful than a fighter with none of the above, I'd have to agree with you. I don't feel that two-weapon fighters are unbalanced because of it. We're talking about 5 feats for that to come into play, so the character with these benefits would have to be either near-epic or a ranger who receives the feats for free when not using medium/heavy armor. A fighter with heavy armor and a vast plethora of feats can certainly compete with a dual-wielder. I think we also have to look at it from a logical perspective. If there is an ambidexterity feat (and there should be, if nothing else, for role-playing reasons), then characters who have it cannot logically have an off-hand, and therefore, neither hand should be penalized. For that matter, maybe ambidexterity shouldn't be as much a feat as it is an option - typical right-handed characters have 1x STR on their right hands and .5 STR on their left hands, left-handed characters have the opposite, and ambidextrous characters have .75 STR on both hands. It doesn't entirely seem reasonable that they are weaker than other characters in this manner, but this actually seems more acceptable than making ambidextrous have off-hands despite the feat. Perhaps as another method of balancing, ambidexterity might instead give equal dexterity modifiers to each hand. Therefore, to receive the benefits of ambidexterity, the player would have to take the weapon finesse feat and use an applicable weapon to have a full effective strength modifier. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
Ambidexterity in 3.5
Top