Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kaffis" data-source="post: 2093921" data-attributes="member: 10305">Why? See, ambidexterity just got rolled into TWF. It's assumed that if you're trained in the TWF style of combat, you've practiced your offhand to the point that it is equally capable -- that's why TWF buys you from -4/-8 (with one light weapon) straight down to -2/-2 instead of -2/-6 like it would have been in 3.0 with only TWF. Ambidexterity is still there -- it's just assumed for anybody who takes an interest in TWF.Furthermore, to those of you who are advocating ambidexterity as a full strength bonus for the off-hand feat (under the reasoning that you no longer have an off-hand): does this negate the need for a light weapon, as well? After all, you have no off-hand to require a light weapon in.My answer to the second is, no, and this is why ambi-strength (to steal Ranger REG's terminology) is silly. The light weapon, as well as the half-strength bonus, are not credited to it being a hand with which you are less proficient. 3.5 rules don't even provide a mechanism for you to specify handedness, nor does anything require you to have, that I'm aware of (thus the lack of ambidexterity as a seperate feat). Rather, the non-light weapon penalty and the half-strength bonus for one hand (I'm refraining from calling it an off-hand, as they persist even with the TWF+Ambidexterity combo 3.5 feat just as they were present in 3.0 rules with TWF *and* Ambidexterity) represent the difficulty in fighting in a TWF style with two full-sized one-handed weapons. It's just more than even a trained two weapon fighter can manage at full efficiency. Make one light, thus easing the balance and making it less prone to getting in the way as you focus on one hand (and yes, sacrificing some brute force in the hand you choose not to focus on) makes it far more manageable, yet still not penaltyless, as others have suggested.</blockquote>

Verification