Favorite Wielding Style

[Wolfen Priest]

That aside, dual-wielding light weapons is the more effective solution for characters who have a dex bonus at least 2 higher than their strength bonus, provided they have taken weapon finesse for their dual weapon. It just requires more specialization and feats to be effective. High dexterity, low strength fighters need the extra attacks to catch up in damage, and with the right feats they don't lose out on their attack bonus enough to be hurt by it.

But for a really *twinky* player, any fighter-type will have a higher STR than DEX to maximize melee combat anyway. If he/she has a higher DEX, he/she will probably be better off spending feats on ranged combat, neh?

With the -2 for each attack, I just think TWF is underpowered, which is exactly why I made the changes to the ranger class at higher levels. I mean, there has to be some bonus to sticking with the class to level 10, and since that seems to be the direction the ranger is headed anyway, I just do it 2e style, and give them a -0 to hit with TWF. I don't think that's game-breaking, but I do think TWF is underpowered as is. Generally.

 

[wolff96]

I prefer dual-wielding for a lot of characters. (Especially rogues.)

One huge weapon has its advantages as well.

Overall, though, I just like the classic image of a man on horseback with sword and shield. It will always be my favorite from a non-numbers point of view.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

But for a really *twinky* player, any fighter-type will have a higher STR than DEX to maximize melee combat anyway. If he/she has a higher DEX, he/she will probably be better off spending feats on ranged combat, neh?

True. Ranged combat is the optimal solution, but it's nice to have melee to fall back on. It would take many feats for a straight fighter, but a dextrous Ranger or Ranger/Fighter would only have to spend one feat to drastically improve his melee effectiveness: Weapon Finesse(short sword).

With the -2 for each attack, I just think TWF is underpowered, which is exactly why I made the changes to the ranger class at higher levels. I mean, there has to be some bonus to sticking with the class to level 10, and since that seems to be the direction the ranger is headed anyway, I just do it 2e style, and give them a -0 to hit with TWF. I don't think that's game-breaking, but I do think TWF is underpowered as is. Generally.

I do generally agree with you. I also like variations like bow feats instead of the TWF feats for Rangers. It fits better with the archetype, IMO, but that's a whole 'nother can of worms, isn't it?

I also agree with Jollyninja who mentioned that using two weapons that are both larger than shortswords seems like it should be unwieldy. I took a little bit of kali, and it there a lot of moves you can pull off with two short weapons that would end in you taking off one of your own arms (or your own head) if you tried them with two larger weapons. And even with the world's most perfectly balanced masterwork longswords, you'd have to have arms like a gorilla to keep them out of each other's way.

 

[gamecat]

Last bump... I promise

 

[Wolfen Priest]

I'm just wondering... is there any place in the official rules that says a cleric can't cast spells while holding a (say) mace and shield? An earlier post said that they have their cleric either weilding a mace, or a shield, implying that they can't cast spells unless they have a 'free' hand.

The way I've always played, you can cast spells with a weapon & shield in hand, but can't attack the same round (obviously). The shield hand is considered free, I guess; although now that I think about it, such a casting character probably shouldn't get the shield AC bonus...

 

[alsih2o]

pg 148 in the phb says you must be "able to gesture" and pg 151 states you "must have at least 1 hand free"

 

[alsih2o]

just to clarify, that is only for spells with a somatic component...

 

[Wolfen Priest]

Yes, but holding a shield, but not using it's AC bonus would count as a free hand, wouldn't it?

 

[alsih2o]

not in my opinion, if you are holding it, your hand isn't free, if it is on your arm you cant gesture freely.

 

[alsih2o]

alos, i think it is in the spirit of the rules that you use you "dominate" hand to gesture. and the sheild is usually in the "off" hand