Houseruled Twin Strike

If you've 'just noticed' how good the power is, wait until level 20+, you will be crying by then if you don't implement a fix :P.
I would either use the whirling barbarian attack power solution (although it does not address critical hits, I would give the character a full critical on both d12's if either attack roll comes up critical. Give the player who is getting a power nerfed the benefit of the doubt!)
Stalker0's ruling also fixes the power while still resolving the critical hit issue.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Ok, first of all, sorry 'bout the necromancy. The dead walk among us, deal with it.

The recent updates (May 2010) were foreshadowed by speculations of an upcoming 'nerf' to Twin Strike. Although no such 'nerfing' took place, it sparked some discussion on the WotC board of what and how such a nerf could come into play. This eventually lead to me coming up with a new suggestion, a proposed fix if you will (which is not relevant to any of the other ideas I came up with earlier in this thread).

Twin Strike
If the first attack doesn't kill it, the second one might.
At-Will Martial, Weapon
Standard Action Melee or Ranged weapon
Requirement: You must be wielding two melee weapons or a ranged weapon.
Targets: One or two creatures
Attack: Strength vs. AC (melee; main hand and off-hand) or Dexterity vs. AC (ranged), one attack per target. Roll twice for ranged weapons or once for each melee weapon, and use either result against either target.
Hit: 1[W] + Wisdom modifier.
Special: If you target only a single creature, you deal additional damage equal to your Strength (melee) or Dexterity (ranged) modifier.
Increase damage to 2[W] at 21st level.

Allows damage to be spread around, but doesn't take away the crit-fishing opportunities. Also added Wis dmg for flavor, might've been unnecessary.

My main concern is that this might be stepping on the toes of the avenger (although it might prove to be an interesting multi-class/dilettante choice for them).
Copy-pasted from here.

Thoughts? I haven't run any numbers, but this should at least avoid doubling up on static bonuses.
 

My house rule fix for Twin Strike is first to restrict the power to ranged weapons. Secondly, I use the Inherent Bonus rule from DMG2 and the damage bonus from magic weapons cannot be applied. Third, the Dual Strike Fighter at-will is also a Ranger power. Fourth, I also let the PCs in my campaigns apply the ½ level bonus to damage on all powers with an ability score modifier, but as Twin Strike do not have that it will obsolete itself at the Paragon tier.
 

Maybe I'm just daft, but I don't see the problem with Twin Strike.

Make two seperate attacks, deal plain weapon damage. With a longbow, thats 2d8. Averages to 9 damage. Minimum 2, max 16.

Compare to rogue sly flourish, a halfling can do 1W+8. Lets assume a dagger, which is 1d4. On a hit, it's at the minimum 9 damage. Max with a dagger is 12. Using a shortsword, max damage is now 14.

Seems pretty fair to me. Fighters have attacks that do the same kind of thing with sly flourish, depending on the weapon.

I think it's fine. If you're gonna complain, complain about Throw and Stab + Marauders rush. Twin Strike is 2W, Throw and Stab + Marauders Rush combo is 2W+str+wis.

Twin
 

I think it's fine. If you're gonna complain, complain about Throw and Stab + Marauders rush. Twin Strike is 2W, Throw and Stab + Marauders Rush combo is 2W+str+wis.

Twin

The problem with twin strike is not its innate damage, as you mentioned its not that high.

The problem is when you start stacking on bonuses. Magic Weapons, Weapon Focus, Hunter's Quarry, random bonus X,Y,Z. All of those bonuses get magnified with the two attacks of twin strike, making it the highest DPS at-will.

As for throw and stab, it just got erraated.


I am surprised twin strike didn't get nerfed this go around, maybe WOTC is fearful that it would draw too much ire because almost every ranger on the planet is based on that power. You could practically call it a class ability.
 

Hmm. I wonder what the Ranger would be like if instead of quarry and an extra attack built into powers all over the place, it had a class feature to make a minor action 1/round attack against the nearest target.
 

My house rule fix for Twin Strike is first to restrict the power to ranged weapons.

I would go the other way and make it melee only. Melee Rangers are weaker imo than bow rangers, and Twin Strike makes a lot more sense with two weapons than a bow fired really fast.

Ranged rangers have careful strike for extra pain.
 

I find that Dual Strike is more logical for striking with two melee weapons simultaneously.

Twin Strike really works for me as a ranged attack where power is sacrificed for an extra attack. The thing that breaks Twin Strike is the stacking of static modifiers like weapon enhancement bonus, weapon focus and Bracers of Archery. My house rules makes Twin Strike an OK choice at the Heroic tier but sub-optimal at the Paragon tier.

I run a campaign where I have increased the PCs damage output so that the length of the average combat encounter is shortened. I do this because I hate "grind" both as a player and DM. I also like to let my players feel bad-ass, it makes them overconfident and leads them into trouble. :D
 

Good call on throw and stab, I noticed it right after I posted to the thread. It makes Marauder's Rush alot less useful, which makes sense. A high str/wis ranger is gross with the old combo.
 

Ok, I've realised the error of my ways and I now conclude that the issues with Twin Strike are three-fold:

1. Doubling up on static bonuses

2. Dilettante/Multi-class/hybrid abuse

and

3. The overshadowing of other ranger at-will powers


So how does one go about to "fix" this? I'm going to try, so bear with me.

As for Issue nr 1., the obvious intent of Twin Strike is to ensure a hit (compared to other PHB strikers - the rogues desire and ease of gaining combat advantage and the warlock targetting NADS and ability to multi-curse). Later the avenger would take a slightly different route with their oath of enmity, which is similar to the ranger in that it in most circumstances offers what could be equated to a +5 bonus on the attack.

The ranger however, has the added possiblity of dealing damage twice, and can therefore add static bonuses on both occasions. Sadly, there is no clear and simple way of making static bonuses only apply once, since in my mind that would require quite a hefty rewrite and re-interpretation of the rules regarding multiple attack powers and damage rolls.

Twin Strike should therefore consist of but a single damage roll. The question then becomes how this can be achieved without sacrificing damage potential or the very flavour of the power. Let's look at the power's name, Twin Strike - this suggests two identical attacks, but this doesn't necessarily mear that both hit if one hit or that both happen simultaneously. Could it therefore not be logical to assume that the second attack is more of a follow-up blow, albeit similar to the first?

Following this logic, could it then not be seen as a security measure of sorts (as the flavour text implies - If the first attack doesn't kill it, the second one might)? The first attack needn't necessarily hit, as there's another one just around the corner. Should both attacks hit, it's a slightly gamebreaking double whammy. On the contrary, should neither attack hit it's Lady Fortune making rude gestures at your back.Generally though, at least one attack will hit, and that's fine. It's when both hit that the DM starts to twitch. So how can we preserve the odds that at least one hit, but not both?

I have a radical proposal. Make Twin Strike an auto-hit, 1[W] damage at-will power that triggers when you miss with an attack. Now hear me out before you launch the nukes.

First, this should be a class feature. This conveniently takes out Issue nr.2 (or at least neuters it radically, as this requires some heavy multi-classing or wasting your precious Hybrid talent feat), and practically dissolves Issue nr. 3 (albeit it is of less use to certain ranger builds, it is now a class feature as any other). Second, this would of course have some limitations, such as only being usable once per round and only in conjunction with melee or ranged at-will attack powers. Thirdly, I would suggest limiting this extra attack against the same enemy to avoid stepping on the monk's feet (i.e. Flurry of Blows, although that requires a hit and has a lower damage potential).

Here's a formatted version of my suggestion:
Twin Strike Ranger Class Feature
If the first attack doesn't kill it, the second one might.
At-Will (Special) Martial, Weapon
Free Action Melee or Ranged
weapon
Requirement: You must be wielding two melee weapons or a ranged weapon.
Trigger: You miss an enemy with a melee or ranged at-will attack power.
Target: The triggering enemy.
Effect: The target takes 1[W] damage in addition to any other damage it would sustain from the attack (If you used your main hand weapon for the triggering attack you must use your off-hand weapon for the damage roll, and vice versa).
Special: You can use this power once per round.
Level 21: The target takes 2[W] damage in addition to any other damage it would sustain from the attack.
Some tweaking might be called for. Should the trigger require a ranger at-will attack power, maybe even a 1st level ranger at-will attack power? Is the level 21 damage boost uncalled for? Should there be further frequency limitations, such as Wis modifier times per encounter, or even day? Is this a stand-alone class feature or would it be a replacement for another, such as Prime Shot? Maybe this could be denied Beast Mastery rangers instead of Prime Shot? what kind of feat support should such a feature need, a paragon feat to have it also trigger on a hit, target another creature or deal additional damage? There's a lot to ponder...

Now what do you think, am I completely off my game here?
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top