D&D 3E/3.5 Improved 2weapon fighting for 3.5E, homebrew;

[Trance-Zg]

My friends and I debated long time about usefulness ond/or cost of 2WF and decided to buff it up and tried it in one campaign over 20 or so sessions.

Main reason was that 2WF simply does not give anything except spending feats.

Ok, one good reason is that it looks cool to fight "florentine style" or be Drizzt Do'Urden wannabe(not cool).

Simply put 2WF fighting fails to deliver in comparison to 2Handed or sword&board style. And full round action requirement makes it even worse.

So we came up with this changes;

2 weapon fighting feat stays the same; -2 penalties for offhand light, -4 for offhand medium.

As a standard action you can make both attacks with the same penalty. Same goes for charge.

Iterative attacks at +6/+11/+16 B.A.B. are automatic for your off hand w/o any feats requirement.

Oversized 2WF treats medium offhand as light for penalties as usual but also gives full STR modifier to offhand damage.

Sneak attack/sudden strike/skirmish are with primary hand ONLY is only standard actios is available to attack; I.E. surprise round/using move action to get flanking position. This rule is ignored when rogue/ninja/scout gets B.A.B +6, then it gets bonus damage with both attacks in standard/charge action.

We first did number crunching with greatsword and power attack vs. 2 shortswords, short + longsword and 2 longswords. On paper greatsword with -2 pen from P.A. still came little ahead except in comparison to 2 longswords combo but it took 2 feats to make that style work and that's ok. 2 feats should give you more than 1 feat.


P.S. in the campaign our rogue/ranger still sucked in comparison to our greatsword wielding barbarian meat grinder. Even when faced with Damage reduction of low as 5 2WF style bites the dust. Again...

but atleast is not complete rubbish anymore.

Opinions?

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Main reason was that 2WF simply does not give anything except spending feats.

I think extra attacks are useful. *shrug*

Simply put 2WF fighting fails to deliver in comparison to 2Handed or sword&board style. And full round action requirement makes it even worse.

It does not fail compared to sword and board. The only thing worse than sword and board is "single hand only" style.

As a standard action you can make both attacks with the same penalty. Same goes for charge.

Sounds good.

Iterative attacks at +6/+11/+16 B.A.B. are automatic for your off hand w/o any feats requirement.

I think this is too good. TWF is already giving massive penalty reducers and the ability to draw two weapons in the time it normally takes to draw one. I don't think needing two more feats over the next 10-15 levels (depending on your BAB) is so awful. What I did in my houserules was that ITWF and GTWF, in addition to the extra attack, also reduced the TWF penalty by 1, so with both and a light off-hand weapon, you eventually had no penalty. Further, I made Two Weapon Defense into a single feat that auto scaled with the number of off-hand attacks you got.

Oversized 2WF treats medium offhand as light for penalties as usual but also gives full STR modifier to offhand damage.

That's fine, I did the same.

Sneak attack/sudden strike/skirmish are with primary hand ONLY is only standard actios is available to attack; I.E. surprise round/using move action to get flanking position. This rule is ignored when rogue/ninja/scout gets B.A.B +6, then it gets bonus damage with both attacks in standard/charge action.

Why did you need to nerf this? Just let 'em do it!


One last thing that might help...I've long debated with myself and friends about changing Haste to grant an extra move action rather than an extra attack. First of all, then it would actually be the mirror opposite of Slow (reducing you to a move or standard each round is effectively the same as depriving you of a move action). Second of all, it would be a huge help to classes that rely on full attacking with a lot of weak attacks, like TWF and Monks, who often need help getting to full attack in melee. And normal Haste is more beneficial to 2H weapon users, since they do more damage per attack, a flat +1 attack is better for them. It would also help Scouts out a lot, which I don't have a problem with. And since no spells really use Move action to cast, it'd still not be abusable by casters.

 

[Trance-Zg]

I think extra attacks are useful. *shrug*

depends on the cost and the punch of the attack

It does not fail compared to sword and board. The only thing worse than sword and board is "single hand only" style.

Well, +2 armor or +3 with fighter and extreme shield is nice trade off for some little offhand damage and lower attack roll.

I think this is too good. TWF is already giving massive penalty reducers and the ability to draw two weapons in the time it normally takes to draw one. I don't think needing two more feats over the next 10-15 levels (depending on your BAB) is so awful. What I did in my houserules was that ITWF and GTWF, in addition to the extra attack, also reduced the TWF penalty by 1, so with both and a light off-hand weapon, you eventually had no penalty. Further, I made Two Weapon Defense into a single feat that auto scaled with the number of off-hand attacks you got.

You went with saving feats in 2weapon defense, I went with saving in improving 2wf feats. Also reducing WF penalties I would save for Tempest PrC(so it has some use in game).

Why did you need to nerf this? Just let 'em do it!

Actually, per official rule you have to make full-attack action to get bonus damage dies for more than one attack.

One last thing that might help...I've long debated with myself and friends about changing Haste to grant an extra move action rather than an extra attack. First of all, then it would actually be the mirror opposite of Slow (reducing you to a move or standard each round is effectively the same as depriving you of a move action). Second of all, it would be a huge help to classes that rely on full attacking with a lot of weak attacks, like TWF and Monks, who often need help getting to full attack in melee. And normal Haste is more beneficial to 2H weapon users, since they do more damage per attack, a flat +1 attack is better for them. It would also help Scouts out a lot, which I don't have a problem with. And since no spells really use Move action to cast, it'd still not be abusable by casters.

I like the idea, but... wouldn't the caster object that they want to combine 2 move actions into standard action and get 2 spells per round. That is old 3.0E haste which was really broken.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Actually, per official rule you have to make full-attack action to get bonus damage dies for more than one attack..

Only per the Rules Compendium. In a game that uses logical rules, that has never ever been the case anywhere else in any prior book. The rule was for "volley-like" spells only, not for nonmagical attacks. The rule is total bs, the game up until that point had no such restriction. See Greater Manyshot, for example.

I like the idea, but... wouldn't the caster object that they want to combine 2 move actions into standard action and get 2 spells per round. That is old 3.0E haste which was really broken.

They could also complain that if the Fighter's getting another attack, they should get to shoot another fireball. Doesn't mean you allow it. There's no rules precedent for merging actions into a greater one, aside from a full round action basically being a move + standard.

 

[PureGoldx58]

One last thing that might help...I've long debated with myself and friends about changing Haste to grant an extra move action rather than an extra attack. First of all, then it would actually be the mirror opposite of Slow (reducing you to a move or standard each round is effectively the same as depriving you of a move action). Second of all, it would be a huge help to classes that rely on full attacking with a lot of weak attacks, like TWF and Monks, who often need help getting to full attack in melee. And normal Haste is more beneficial to 2H weapon users, since they do more damage per attack, a flat +1 attack is better for them. It would also help Scouts out a lot, which I don't have a problem with. And since no spells really use Move action to cast, it'd still not be abusable by casters.

Do not do that. That means they get a Full Round action and a move action...Ie: Pounce. EVERY time.

Or 3 move actions, giving ranged units even more chances to get away when they can't attack.

Edit: a better ruling would be that it allows a 2weapon fighter with said feats to gain an additional attack. so 2 more vs 1 that could also be exploited but better off that than a 2wf with a sort of pounce.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

The rules already let anyone have Pounce that wants it. It's called Lion Totem Barbarian 1.

And I would not recommend letting someone w/ TWF get an extra attack with haste. Sets a real nasty precedent for stuff with 6 arms and multiweapon fighting, for example. You could just cap it at two, but that'd just seem strange and arbitrary.