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
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Help crafting an Eladrin Fighter
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="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 4912272" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Well, there is endless debate on the whole topic of double weapons, particularly the Urgrosh and Double Sword, though the other two bother some people as well. Some people feel they are simply overpowered, particularly in the hands of tempest fighters, TBF rangers, and rogues (well that covers pretty close to all serious melee classes right there...). Other people feel they are just OP in the sense that any character who would contemplate using two weapons would be crazy not to take a double weapon. Then there are those who just don't have a problem with them. </p><p></p><p>If you fall into category 1, then banning them is basically pretty much the reasonable response. </p><p></p><p>If you fall into category 2, then there is room for various tweaks. According to one statement made by the 4e design team they had intended double weapons to act entirely like 2 independent weapons with different types and with the off-hand and defensive keywords on the "minor" end of the weapon only. Apparently the goal was to give two weapon wielders a way to not be forced to keep up with 2 magic weapons by allowing the enhancement bonus to apply to both ends. So that would be one approach. It definitely has a slight impact on tempest fighters if you do that. They'll loose 1 point of damage with the "main" end of the weapon and RoB will have to do d8 damage. It will have basically no impact on rangers and rogues though unless they're MC to fighter for RoB and even then as I said before the difference is not that great.</p><p></p><p>I guess if you feel that double weapons are STILL OP, you could drop the defensive property. However that pretty much puts them exactly on a par with wielding 2 military weapons, so rangers might as well not bother. Rogues might still be interested though. It would cost tempest a point of AC, but otherwise doesn't really give them much reason not to keep using the urgrosh since RoB/spear stuff is the whole point anyway really.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 4912272, member: 82106"] Well, there is endless debate on the whole topic of double weapons, particularly the Urgrosh and Double Sword, though the other two bother some people as well. Some people feel they are simply overpowered, particularly in the hands of tempest fighters, TBF rangers, and rogues (well that covers pretty close to all serious melee classes right there...). Other people feel they are just OP in the sense that any character who would contemplate using two weapons would be crazy not to take a double weapon. Then there are those who just don't have a problem with them. If you fall into category 1, then banning them is basically pretty much the reasonable response. If you fall into category 2, then there is room for various tweaks. According to one statement made by the 4e design team they had intended double weapons to act entirely like 2 independent weapons with different types and with the off-hand and defensive keywords on the "minor" end of the weapon only. Apparently the goal was to give two weapon wielders a way to not be forced to keep up with 2 magic weapons by allowing the enhancement bonus to apply to both ends. So that would be one approach. It definitely has a slight impact on tempest fighters if you do that. They'll loose 1 point of damage with the "main" end of the weapon and RoB will have to do d8 damage. It will have basically no impact on rangers and rogues though unless they're MC to fighter for RoB and even then as I said before the difference is not that great. I guess if you feel that double weapons are STILL OP, you could drop the defensive property. However that pretty much puts them exactly on a par with wielding 2 military weapons, so rangers might as well not bother. Rogues might still be interested though. It would cost tempest a point of AC, but otherwise doesn't really give them much reason not to keep using the urgrosh since RoB/spear stuff is the whole point anyway really. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Help crafting an Eladrin Fighter
Top