Making 2 weapon fighting not suck-o-rama

[FreeTheSlaves]

Especially poison.

-- N

Yup, I can see a melee built TWF assassin being quite viable.

 

[KarinsDad]

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.

The THW fighter can have a weapon of adamantine and a weapon of silver, just like the TW fighter.

He then uses what he thinks he needs.

Any factor that you give the TW fighter can be given to the THW fighter.


If you add other factors into your analysis like Sneak Attack damage, fine. You add those factors to both Fighters to get a fair analysis.

Plus, by the time you get significant sneak attack damage of any value, many of your opponents (i.e. many of the non-humanoid ones) are immune to it either directly, or because they cannot lose their Dex bonus, or whatever.


Both fighters can have the exact same abilities. They can have the same type of weapons.


It still becomes a factor of full round attacks only occuring at most 50% (give or take) of the time. Hence, during a single attack (a normal attack or an Attack of Opportunity), the TWF does about 3 + .5 Str (+ Power Attack damage if used) more damage. It matters not a whit what other factors you add in.

It only matters for a full round attack. There, low level is the most advantageous for the TW fighter (because at higher levels, one extra attack means less, especially since all of the attacks are at -10% to hit PLUS he has to take feats in order to bump that up). Hence, his damage becomes (assuming a 4.5 average longsword in one hand and a 3.5 average shortsword in the other):

2x% * (4 + bonuses) versus (x+10%) * (7 + bonuses + 3 + .5 Str)

So yes, if you can get the bonuses to go through the roof, you can catch up. But in order to do that, 2x% * (4 + bonuses) must be greater than (x+10%) * (7 + bonuses + 3 + .5 Str)

At low level, the highest chance to hit is generally in the ball park of 50%, hence:

4 + bonuses > 4.2 + 0.6 bonuses + 2 + 0.3 Str

or bonuses > 5.5 + 0.75 Str

Str 10: 5.5
Str 12: 6.25
Str 14: 7
Str 16: 7.75
Str 18: 8.5
Str 20: 9.25

It's hard at lower levels to get extra bonuses this high. Plus, this example here was with a 50% chance to hit with a -2 thrown in. Your chances to hit most opponents at lower levels will be less than that which gives the THW fighter even more of an edge.

So, on single attacks, the TW fighter does significantly less damage, regardless of other factors. On full round attacks, he does less damage as well unless he has really high bonuses for damage.


The problem for the TW fighter is that he always does less damage on a single attack (approximately 2.5 + 0.5 Str + Power Attack if used).

Always (if you analysis two combatants with the same basic abilities).

So even if he can boost his bonus damage through the roof (which the THW fighter can do as well), the only time he can even come close to the same amount of damage on average is when he does a full round attack.


Btw, criticals are totally irrelevant to the conversation at all if the weapons used have the same critical chances (e.g. 2 handed sword at 19/20 x2 versus a longsword and short sword both at 19/20 x2).

The reason is that criticals increase the percentage damage exactly the same. So, increasing the THW average damage by 10% and increasing the TW average damage by 10% still means that if one character does more average damage than the other, he still does more average damage once you factor in criticals.


Bottom line, create and post any combatant type PC you want (i.e. one with at least one level of Ranger, Paladin, Fighter, or Barbarian) at any level you want with any reasonable set of abilities out of the core rules and show us how much damage he can average fighting two weapon (both for single attacks and full round attacks). I will then illustrate how the exact same PC can average more damage for single attacks and as much or nearly as much with full round attacks fighting with a two handed weapon and the only things I will change are replacing his TW feats with other feats, and replacing his two one hand weapons with two two handed weapons (i.e. if you give him two one handed magical weapons, I will replace that with two two handed magical weapons).

It seems that the only way to prove to you how much more potent THW fighting is will be to allow you to stack the deck in favor of the TW fighter and then illustrate that the exact same fighter still does more damage fighting THW.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Bottom line, create and post any combatant type PC you want (i.e. one with at least one level of Ranger, Paladin, Fighter, or Barbarian) at any level you want with any reasonable set of abilities out of the core rules and show us how much damage he can average fighting two weapon (both for single attacks and full round attacks).

This is missing the point because 2WF doesn't shine for the combatant classes it shines for the rogue. I will take you up on your offer if we compare rogue for rogue - default array, average hps, core rules only, standard wealth (no item > half starting wealth).

The problem the game designers faced was whether to make 2WF comparable to other styles for the baseline fighter (which would allow the rogue to really benefit, thereby in effect limiting choice for rogue player) or to balance TWF from the pov of the class that benefit the most from the style.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

"2WF Rogue"

Human male rogue 9
Neutral
str13 dex17(19) con14 int10 wis8 cha12, HPs = 52/52
Feats: TWF, Imp. TWF, Weapon finesse, weapon focus (short sword), skill focus UMD
Skills: tumble+16, use magic device+16, 4*skills max ranked, 6*skills half ranked
Equipment: cold iron +1 short sword of frost (10k), +1 shortsword of flame (8k), mithril breastplate+1 (5k=1k+4k), wand of invisibility (50*charges, 4.5k), gloves of dex+2, ring of deflection+1, cloak of resistance+1, 0.75k remaining from 36K
Class: sneak attack +5d6, improved uncanny dodge, evasion, trapfinding

Att: standard attack with frost sword +12 {1d6+2+1d6 frost (19+,*2)} +5d6 sneak attack
full atack is frost sword +10/+5 {1d6+2+1d6 frost (19+,*2)} +5d6 sneak attack & flame sword +10/+5 {1d6+2+1d6 flame (19+,*2)} +5d6 sneak attack
AC: 20, Initiative:+4, Speed:30', Fort:+6 Ref:+11 Will:+3

****

Such a character typically actives the invisibility or tumbles (depending on the level of threat posed, roll a 4+) to close with an enemy engaging the party tank & then unleashes a full attack before tumbling away.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

"2Handed Rogue"

Human male rogue 9
Neutral
str16(18) dex14 con14 int10 wis12 cha8, HPs = 52/52
Feats: Dodge, Mobility, Spring attack, Martial weapon prof. (Greatsword), Weapon focus (Greatsword)
Skills: tumble+16, 5*skills max ranked, 6*skills half ranked
Equipment: +1 Adamantine electrical greatsword (11k=3k+8k), mithril breastplate+2 (8k=4k+4k), gloves of str+2, cloak of resistance+2, boots of springing and striding, ring of deflection+1, 1.75k remaining from 36K
Class: sneak attack +5d6, improved uncanny dodge, evasion, trapfinding

Att: standard attack with sword +12 {2d6+7+1d6 elec (19+,*2)} +5d6 sneak attack
full atack is sword +12/+7 {2d6+7+1d6 elec (19+,*2)} +5d6 sneak attack
AC: 20, Initiative:+2, Speed:40', Fort:+7 Ref:+10 Will:+6

****

Such a character relies upon using his superior speed to spring into combat, using tumble as necessary, to flank the enemy facing the party tank, deliver a telling blow and then move out of full attack range, using the tank's threat of an AoO for safety.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

The point of the above illustrations is to show how both characters are what I consider viable builds - I would be pleased to see one of my players present me with something similar & I myself would feel fine to play one such.

If 2WF is altered to compare favourably between two fighter builds I predict that if then I then posted the two rogue examples again, the 2WF would clearly be the better build - and thus the "choice" of fighting style would be null & void because one would be a no-brainer to choose.

Anything that fundamentally undermines the tactical choice of fighting style is imho, bad. It is called a style for a reason, it should (nay, Must!) not always be the perfect tactic but it should shine in the circumstances where it is supposed to.

(animated shield - I hate what you represent)

 

[KarinsDad]

"2WF Rogue"

Human male rogue 9
Neutral
str13 dex17(19) con14 int10 wis8 cha12, HPs = 52/52
Feats: TWF, Imp. TWF, Weapon finesse, weapon focus (short sword), skill focus UMD
Skills: tumble+16, use magic device+16, 4*skills max ranked, 6*skills half ranked
Equipment: cold iron +1 short sword of frost (10k), +1 shortsword of flame (8k), mithril breastplate+1 (5k=1k+4k), wand of invisibility (50*charges, 4.5k), gloves of dex+2, ring of deflection+1, cloak of resistance+1, 0.75k remaining from 36K
Class: sneak attack +5d6, improved uncanny dodge, evasion, trapfinding

Att: standard attack with frost sword +12 {1d6+2+1d6 frost (19+,*2)} +5d6 sneak attack
full atack is frost sword +10/+5 {1d6+2+1d6 frost (19+,*2)} +5d6 sneak attack & flame sword +10/+5 {1d6+2+1d6 flame (19+,*2)} +5d6 sneak attack
AC: 20, Initiative:+4, Speed:30', Fort:+6 Ref:+11 Will:+3

****

Such a character typically actives the invisibility or tumbles (depending on the level of threat posed, roll a 4+) to close with an enemy engaging the party tank & then unleashes a full attack before tumbling away.

This is missing the point because 2WF doesn't shine for the combatant classes it shines for the rogue. I will take you up on your offer if we compare rogue for rogue - default array, average hps, core rules only, standard wealth (no item > half starting wealth).

First off, your calculation on damage is slightly incorrect. The 1D6 for frost and for flame apply like sneak attack damage after all other calculations (i.e. if you critical, you add up all of the damage except frost and sneak attack and then add it in). It does not get added in twice on a critical.

Ok. I replace the TWF and TWF Imp and Weapon Focus (short sword) feats with Exotic Weapon Spiked Chain, Combat Reflexes, and Weapon Focus (Spiked Chain).

He has a +2 Frost Spiked Chain for 18K instead of the two short swords.

Let’s take an opponent of AC 25 (fairly reasonable at 9th level).


On a single attack (like a normal attack or an Attack of Opportunity), the damage is:

45% * ((2D4+3) * 1.05 (critical) + 1D6) = 5.544 average damage

versus

40% * ((D6+2) * 1.1 (critical) + 1D6) = 3.82 average damage


On a single sneak attack (like an AoO with flank), the damage is (with +2 on the attack due to being flank):

55% * ((2D4+3) * 1.05 (critical) + 6D6) = 16.17 average damage

versus

50% * ((D6+2) * 1.1 (critical) + 6D6) = 13.525 average damage


On a single invisible sneak attack (like an AoO when invisible), the damage is (with +2 on the attack due to being invisible and the opponent losing 2 AC from a 14 Dex on the attack because you are invisible):

65% * ((2D4+3) * 1.05 (critical) + 6D6) = 19.11 average damage

versus

60% * ((D6+2) * 1.1 (critical) + 6D6) = 16.23 average damage


On a full round attack, the damage is:

(45% + 20%) * ((2D4+3) * 1.05 (critical) + 1D6) = 7.735 average damage

versus

(30% + 5% + 30% + 5%) * ((D6+2) * 1.1 (critical) + 1D6) = 6.685 average damage


On a full round sneak attack (assuming +2 to hit due to flank), the damage is:

(55% + 30%) * ((2D4+3) * 1.05 (critical) + 6D6) = 24.99 average damage

versus

(40% + 15% + 40% + 15%) * ((D6+2) * 1.1 (critical) + 6D6) = 29.755 average damage


On a full round sneak attack (assuming +2 to hit due to flank and +2 on the first attack due to being invisible and the opponent losing 2 AC from a 14 Dex on the very first attack because you are invisible), the damage is:

(75% + 30%) * ((2D4+3) * 1.05 (critical) + 6D6) = 30.87 average damage

versus

(60% + 15% + 40% + 15%) * ((D6+2) * 1.1 (critical) + 6D6) = 35.165 average damage


The only time the Rogue with the two weapons has an advantage in average damage is in the full round sneak attack cases. However, if he is tumbling away in order to go invisible again, he is at a disadvantage in average damage per combat BECAUSE he is only attacking one round in two (or even three). His average damage at least halves. On the other hand, if he stays put and fights, he will probably not get full round sneak attack damage in every round either (especially since some higher level creatures have immunities or defenses against sneak attacks).

The Rogue with the Spiked Chain, on the other hand, has a 10 foot reach with the spiked chain, so every other round, he can be 15 feet away from his opponent (by full round attacking with or without sneak attack from 10 feet away and then backing up 5 feet) and unless his opponent also has reach, his opponent cannot full round attack back on him. So, he can full round attack most rounds, full round sneak attack on the rounds on which his allies flank with him, and still not be full round attacked back every round. With a 10 foot reach, he also has more chances for Attacks of Opportunities with his Combat Reflexes, especially for opponents who move up to him from 15 or more feet away. This is especially helpful when the Rogue himself is surprised and an opponent moves up to him in the surprise round or in round one before he acts.

In fact, fighting a single foe who does not have reach and does not have tumble, he can attack twice at full damage per round compared to his opponent's once per round. He does this by attacking, and then tumbling away 15 feet or more. He then gets an Attack of Opportunity against his opponent as the opponent rushes in plus his normal attack each round.

All in all, the Rogue with the Spiked Chain still AVERAGES more damage per combat and also can fight more rounds of combat (due to taking less average damage back due to sometimes doing the 15 foot trick) which also increases his damage per combat.

 

[Infiniti2000]

It seems that the only way to prove to you how much more potent THW fighting is will be to allow you to stack the deck in favor of the TW fighter and then illustrate that the exact same fighter still does more damage fighting THW.

Maybe I'm just not making my point clearly enough. You just plain can't be complete enough. Or, at least it would be impractical. By doing this analysis in the first place, you are basically making the biggest, and most erroneous, assumption of all. Most of us, probably 99%, play D&D or d20 as a group, not individually. Any analysis you do, therefore, must include the other 3 (typical) party members. IMC, for example, the party sorcerer frequently dim doors the delayed TWF to the opponent, allowing him a full round of attacks (4 primary, 2 secondary, 1 haste). How do the other members of the group affect/help/hinder the fighter's tactics? Obviously, it can be quite varied. Another assumption you make is ignoring the possibility of multiple opponents with different DR (happens frequently at higher levels). The TWF has some advantage in that regard. And then the worst assumption IMO is that the other aspects of the character are ignored (not considering AC or any feats/skills 'wasted' on RP reasons).

I'm not taking up any challenge because it would be counter to my point in that any such analysis is flawed and incomplete. Why would I undertake what I consider to be a futile endeavor? Merely statting up two alternate 5th level, 10th level, or even 20th level fighters and comparing something as useless (IMO) as 'average damage' is not worthwhile because it's a situation that never occurs in the game.

 

[two]

Maybe I'm just not making my point clearly enough. You just plain can't be complete enough. Or, at least it would be impractical. By doing this analysis in the first place, you are basically making the biggest, and most erroneous, assumption of all. Most of us, probably 99%, play D&D or d20 as a group, not individually. Any analysis you do, therefore, must include the other 3 (typical) party members. IMC, for example, the party sorcerer frequently dim doors the delayed TWF to the opponent, allowing him a full round of attacks (4 primary, 2 secondary, 1 haste). How do the other members of the group affect/help/hinder the fighter's tactics? Obviously, it can be quite varied. Another assumption you make is ignoring the possibility of multiple opponents with different DR (happens frequently at higher levels). The TWF has some advantage in that regard. And then the worst assumption IMO is that the other aspects of the character are ignored (not considering AC or any feats/skills 'wasted' on RP reasons).

I'm not taking up any challenge because it would be counter to my point in that any such analysis is flawed and incomplete. Why would I undertake what I consider to be a futile endeavor? Merely statting up two alternate 5th level, 10th level, or even 20th level fighters and comparing something as useless (IMO) as 'average damage' is not worthwhile because it's a situation that never occurs in the game.

Well, if you play by the rules, Dim Dooring next to a bad guy is a very stupid thing to do. Read the spell.

Again, you bring up DR. I don't think you understand just much this fails to support your cause. Please explain how the TWF somehow has an easier way getting through some obscure DR than the two-handed weapon user. *note as always the two-handed weapon user has more money to play around with for his weapon and options, including oils and etc.*

I don't think it's that complicated at all. Bring the rest of the party into it.

If the TWF requires a lot of actions by the rest of the party members in order to be effective, and the two-handed weapon user does not, that hardly helps the case of the TWF!!

Let me pu it this way: take a two-handed weapon user. Boom. Done. Doesn't need help. Is self-sufficient. Hits hard with one attack, hits really really hard with a full attack. Given that no feats are used for this style, could easily have PBS, Rapid Shot, and Precise shot if desired, giving excellent ranged options. While the TWF is the one-trick pony due to feat requirements. Ranged feats? Good luck TWF user.

The beauty of the two-handed weapon build is that it's simple, requires no feats, requires no great expenditure of money, and doesn't depend on special tactics/party members to be effective. (in fact, it's way too good, in my opinion).

 

[Infiniti2000]

Well, if you play by the rules, Dim Dooring next to a bad guy is a very stupid thing to do. Read the spell.

Why is it very stupid for the sorcerer to dim door the ftr/rgr next to the bad guy such that the ftr/rgr is between them? Sure, the sorcerer can't take any other actions that round, but getting the fighter with favored enemy, bane, holy, and wounding weapons into a full attack is sometimes more than worth it. The same tactic can be done with the THF, sure, but it helps negate the claim of "50% are single attacks." Now, explain to me why this tactic is "very stupid."