Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mengu" data-source="post: 4671022" data-attributes="member: 65726">Defensive property alone is not the problem with double weapons. The Urgosh as an off-hand weapon that does 1d12 damage is pretty broken. It's the reason why you can have a 1st level dwarf fighter attacking with an at-will power at +9 vs AC, and dealing 1d12+11 damage. One wonders why they call it a defender instead of striker. I think double weapons are typically one benefit too many for a feat (especially so in the case of dwarven weapon training, which comes out to like three and a half feats in one). For instance if the double sword did 1d6/1d6 damage, and didn't have the heavy blade property, it would be worth the 1 feat, for gaining a +1 AC and lowering cost of two magic weapons down to one. If it didn't have the off-hand property and light blade property, again it would remain useful.</blockquote>