Making 2 weapon fighting not suck-o-rama

[The Souljourner]

^^^^ What he said. Plus, don't forget double power attack versus no power attack (or at best, PA with only one weapon while *both* weapons get the penalty to hit).

TWF has a huge number of drawbacks that just don't have any balancing benefits. The problem is that people are still worried about two weapons meaning double damage, and it's really not. WoTC over-applied the balancing factors... any one of which would have done the trick, but all together they make TWF pretty sucky.

-The Souljourner

 

[Infiniti2000]

You're still not making a balanced analysis. It would simply not be possible or at least not feasible. You're making a number of assumptions all in favor of the THF (ignore criticals, ignore DR, low level, add power attack, etc.). You ignore some things for various reasons (for simplicity or whatever), and yet it's those things that make the difference. The problem is that it's not feasible to account for everything such that the analysis is fair and some of the things that you need to account for have no real metric without making huge assumptions. For example, how big of a deal is material DR in a standard campaign? How big of a deal is it in yours? The TWF has a significant advantage over the THF in that regard.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

That just means you need decent Dex *and* strength. Hardly a benefit. And if you don't have decent strength, you're already far behind in the game.

You don't need strength at all, sneak attack, specialization & bonus dice can fulfill that.

Uhh... you still have to enhance your second weapon, and that is, by definition, twice as expensive as enhancing a shield.

I already noted this, however not needing to enhance a shield is a pro - how can it not be. I am looking at all things in isolation.

Bah, if you have better dex, you have better dex. Nothing says a two handed fighter can't have just as good dex. And if you're trading strength for dex, you're crippling your fighter. Strength = damage.

I look at balance from the POV of 25pt default array, this is my baseline where all my assumptions spring from. Even under the 4d6dl with its high variables you will on average not get enough good scores for everything, something needs to be dumped, eg melee rogue pumps dex & con + pick weapon finesse.

* Also lacks massive single hit when you can't make a full attack - such as attacks of opportunity, charging, move and attack, spring attack, surprise rounds, etc.

Mentioned.

It's viable. Barely. And you really need to understand that you're gimping yourself horribly for something that is really just a matter of style. You can make up for it somewhat by cheesing out every last bit of bonus damage you can find... but what you're basically doing is working your ass off to keep up with two hander who gets all this crap for free.

-The Souljourner

I believe that the correct way to look at any game mechanic is from the POV of where it is optimized best? In the case of TWF we need to look at the rogue because of their sneak attack, high dex and weapon finesse. Without bothering to detail my argument, I believe that if 2WF was any better than it is it would make it a no-brainer for every standard built rogue to take it.

I fully accept that a TWF fighter sucks compared to a 2hander but then my issue is with 2handers getting it too good (only S&B has the money right afaic) but implementing a power attack 1:1.5 ratio & auto-banning the animated shield monstrosity sorts that out somewhat.

If I was going to make a 2WF fighter I'd use a double weapon to get the 2hander benefits as required and switch styles to suit - and I'd carry a shield for when closing with missilers.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

I'd like to point out that people keep saying that TWF has an advantage in situations where your opponent is almost dead, you do not waste as much damage.

This is an extremely minor advantage, practically not worth mentioning.

I agree with you, it is not worth mentioning but what I'm pointing to is the full health mook with 10hp that gets taken down with a minimum of fuss. There can then be 5' steps to attack beyond rather than the immediate cleave - in effect better battlefield control.

Even this is a minor advantage but one nonetheless.

****

Open question for all those who don't like the existing 2WF rules: how would you make the style better and what sort of character build would get the best mileage out of your changes?

 

[Brother MacLaren]

Open question for all those who don't like the existing 2WF rules: how would you make the style better and what sort of character build would get the best mileage out of your changes?

I'd suggest that people unhappy with 2WF as-is take a good look at the Dervish and Tempest classes. So any rules changes would have to keep in mind these PrC's.

 

[ZuulMoG]

Open question for all those who don't like the existing 2WF rules: how would you make the style better and what sort of character build would get the best mileage out of your changes?

I wouldn't change a thing. It's perfectly balanced with S&B, 2HF is what needs fixing. I suggest an AC penalty to two-handed weapons to offset their enormously unbalanced damage advantage.

 

[KarinsDad]

You're still not making a balanced analysis. It would simply not be possible or at least not feasible. You're making a number of assumptions all in favor of the THF (ignore criticals, ignore DR, low level, add power attack, etc.). You ignore some things for various reasons (for simplicity or whatever), and yet it's those things that make the difference. The problem is that it's not feasible to account for everything such that the analysis is fair and some of the things that you need to account for have no real metric without making huge assumptions. For example, how big of a deal is material DR in a standard campaign? How big of a deal is it in yours? The TWF has a significant advantage over the THF in that regard.

What are you talking about?

The THW fighter has the advantage over the TW fighter when it comes to DR.

 

[two]

What are you talking about?

The THW fighter has the advantage over the TW fighter when it comes to DR.

And, arguably, with criticals as well.

The THW fighter can either burn a feat which the TWF can't afford for Improved Critical, or with the money not spent on an extra weapon get a keen scabbard or the keen enchantment.

Plus the obvious point that doing a lot of damage improves your critical damage bunches.

A rare off-hand light weapon critical simply isn't adding much to the TWF's damage output.

Since only about 50% of attacks are (being generous) full attacks, much of the time the TWF is moving and hitting once, i.e. not even getting multiple attacks for multiple chances of criticalling.

Being able to make extra attacks, and getting criticals off them, is pretty tough to do, particularly if you depend on damage dice which don't multiply with a critical (unlike, well, the 2hw user).

I've never, ever seen a TWF build that out-damaged a THF in terms of criticals, ever.

(note feat disparity between TWF and THF builds and money disparity, and how this figures into it, as pointed out at the start).

 

[Infiniti2000]

What are you talking about?

The THW fighter has the advantage over the TW fighter when it comes to DR.

Well, I specifically said material DR, but other types of DR apply. The THF does not have the advantage because he has only 1 weapon (readied, let's say) that could overcome it, where the TWF has 2 and can have two weapons of different materials. I'm just saying that you will be making lots of assumptions during the analysis, because it's not feasible otherwise. And, everytime you make an assumption (e.g. ignore criticals, low level, STR 16), it's usually in favor of one style or another, whether you mean it that way or not. As another example, someone earlier made the assumption to ignore sneak attacks. You just plain can't ignore anything like that if you want a balanced analysis.

 

[Nifft]

I've only skimmed the thread, so sorry if this has been covered before, but ... isn't it kinda obvious that TWF has an advantage in # of attacks, while 2HW has the advantage in raw damage output?

Thus, shouldn't the TWF guy seek things that favor his strengths -- lots of attacks -- rather than try to ALSO gain the 2HW guy's only advantage?


Things That Are Better With Lots of Attacks:

1/ Wounding (and ability damage in general)
2/ Poison (and anything else that triggers a save or two)
3/ Energy damage (and non-multiplied dice damage in general, including Sneak Attack)
4/ Things that trigger, but do not multiply, on a Crit (Keen Flaming Burst / Shocking Burst / Thundering Kukri)


Attacks can do lots of things besides just HP damage. 2HW is better for just doing damage, but TWF might be better for everything else. Especially poison.

-- N