Making 2 weapon fighting not suck-o-rama

[FreeTheSlaves]

The problem with dumping a lot of damage and then bailing is that you are not doing that much productively while bailing.

That's true, I'd assume that tumble/invisibility would be used to get in close, one full attack & then a tumbling retreat. The only way to get a consistant damage output is to use reach, range or spring attack but in all these cases a rogue will never, on average, be better at average damage output than a fighter - attempting to do so is an exercise in futility.

I'm not so sure that I would call a rogue vanishing from sight, delaying/readying, or hiding is a waste in productivity. This will have an impact on the enemies decisions if they recognize the threat that he presents. A duel wielding rogue suddenly appearing next to a dex denied/flanked 2nd rank type is pretty much in their worst dreams.

Hard to say. The spiked chain variant gets more full round attacks in due to threatening a larger area and the 15 foot trick. On the other hand, his opponents can get a few more full round attacks back on him.

I'm weary of any rogue build that requires a near static full attack (2WF included), even one with reach. The problems are that a decent tank will merely take a hit to close and reach enemies are not infrequent themselves. My 'reserve character' rogue (moderate mortality campaign) build uses reach & missile at the expense of being specialized in either.

****

Going back to this threads title, how would you make 2 weapon fighting not suck-o-rama? If I was going to buy into this assumption - I'm reserving my judgement still - the only thing I would change is the sheer number of feats required. I would make the initial 2WF free without need for a feat, this seems to be the biggest complaint closely followed by the necessity of the full attack option and lastly the double wealth investment.

 

[KarinsDad]

Going back to this threads title, how would you make 2 weapon fighting not suck-o-rama?

I would change it from -2/-2 to -1/-1.

That way, it would still take feats, it would still be less damage due to minuses to hit, it would still be less damage due to the 0.5 Str on the off hand weapon, and it would still require investing in two magical weapons.


The way to improve TW fighting without changing the rules is to add either to hit, damage, or both to each attack to the point that the extra damage overcomes the lesser to hit, lesser Str, etc.

That is why the TW fighting Rogue is so comparable to the THW fighting Rogue, not because the Spiked Chain averages 2 points less damage than the Greatsword.

For example, comparing Improved TW fighting and THW fighting (2 bladed sword versus greatsword), both with a non-magical weapon, with a Str of 14, with BAB 6/1, and a 50% chance to hit on the first attack, yields:

(50%+25%) * (2D6 + 3) = 7.5

versus

(40%+15%) * (D8 + 2) + (40%+15%) * (D8 + 1) = 7.8

Here with 3 feats (and nothing else in the mix), the Improved TWF is doing slightly better damage on a full round attack (but less damage on a single attack).

Give both of these characters +5 swords instead and it becomes:

(75%+50%) * (2D6 + 8) = 18.75

versus

(65%+40%) * (D8 + 7) + (65%+40%) * (D8 + 6) = 23.1


Just by giving him a (vastly) better weapon, this has changed the Improved TW fighter from doing 4% more damage (practically the same) to 23% more damage.

There are many ways to do this: Bard Inspirations, Cleric Prayers, magic weapons, etc. Anything which boosts to hit or damage helps the TW fighter more than the THW fighter. The generic problem is that the TW fighter tends to be behind the THW fighter in sheer damage to start out with, hence, he is playing catch up in damage production (as oppopsed to pulling away).

 

[Brother MacLaren]

I would make the initial 2WF free without need for a feat, this seems to be the biggest complaint closely followed by the necessity of the full attack option and lastly the double wealth investment.

Or, you could make the initial 2WF cost a feat to reflect that it is a specialized and uncommon skill, but allow it to give full iterative attacks with the off-hand.

Then, a non-fighter 2WF would have two more feats available to take advantage of the many great options such as 2W Defense, Dual Strike, Oversized 2WF, or the style feats in Complete Warrior.

Tempest class does make the -2/-2 go to -1/-1 and then 0/0. And it gives you two-weapon spring attack. Very good option for 2WF types.

 

[TheEvil]

I still think IndyPendant's idea is the best one. It keeps TWF as a style that only the more dedicated follow, while taking away alot of the complaints against it.

My idea is to slightly enhance the TWF feat chain, but differently from Stalker0's idea. I think my concept enhances TWF enough to make it a fair option, yet not so much that TWF becomes just one of three standard choices. I may even make it canon for my campaigns. What do you guys think?

Feats:
--TWF: As per SRD.
--Improved TWF: As per SRD, and the attack penalties for both weapons are reduced by 2. (So standard TWF is done with no attack penalties.)
--Greater TWF: As per SRD, and all off-hand attacks are made with full Str damage bonus.

CW has a feat already that reduces the fighting penalties; I've just combined it with Improved TWF. These three feats, plus Improved Buckler Defense if you really need the AC(also from CW--though I may have the name wrong; don't have the books with me atm) give the TWF fighter concept enough of a boost to be viable, but not so much as to be overpowered.

Note the prereqs for the feats too. 17 and 19 Dex is nothing to sneeze at! This has the added benefit of putting the TWF Ranger back into the spotlight again, since they can bypass the high Dex prereqs.

What do you think?

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Or, you could make the initial 2WF cost a feat to reflect that it is a specialized and uncommon skill, but allow it to give full iterative attacks with the off-hand.

Hmm, that would work by requiring the front end feat with the benefit of not needing any follow up feats. I was thinking of that but I chose to invert it because I wanted parity with S&B & 2H which do not require any feats at their most basic level (btw, my option costs 2 feats, yours costs 1).

The point of difference between you and I is how we make 2WF "a specialized & uncommon skill" - you want the feat expenditure to back it up while I'd settle for the difficult mastery/standard limitations to reinforce this. Either/or.

Tempest class does make the -2/-2 go to -1/-1 and then 0/0. And it gives you two-weapon spring attack. Very good option for 2WF types.

To be frank, I do not like PrCs built around specializing in a fighting style. If a specialized fighter at 20th level is not the best at any particular fighting style I consider this to be fundamentally wrong - thus activating the auto-ban.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Feats:
--TWF: As per SRD.
--Improved TWF: As per SRD, and the attack penalties for both weapons are reduced by 2. (So standard TWF is done with no attack penalties.)
--Greater TWF: As per SRD, and all off-hand attacks are made with full Str damage bonus.

Note the prereqs for the feats too. 17 and 19 Dex is nothing to sneeze at! This has the added benefit of putting the TWF Ranger back into the spotlight again, since they can bypass the high Dex prereqs.

The problem with this solution is the cost for benefit varies wildly by level. At Low level this fixes nothing, which may be the case for 20+/- sessions (1/2 a campaign) or be skipped entirely by starting at the mid-levels. At the mid-levels the damage output is approaching 2H while leaving S&B behind. At the early high levels the dex prerequisite is the main limiting factor holding back the style (when gloves of dex begin to proliferate) while S&B is well and truly dead by comparison.

This seems to be encouraging the character to start 2H/S&B and switch to 2WF around the mid-levels+.