new feat suggestion: Ambipotency

[Plane Sailing]

Something that I've started introducing to my campaign, I don't recall seeing something similar on the boards

Ambipotency also known as "Flurry of swords".
Pre: Ambidexterity
Benefit: You get full strength bonus with both weapons when fighting with a weapon in either hand.
Normal: Under normal circumstances you only get half your strength bonus for your secondary hand.
Notes: this is similar to the benefit which monks get for free with their "flurry of blows" ability when unarmed or using their special monk weapons.


Cheers

 

[Gurdjieff]

Nice, gives me a good reason to monkey grip those greatswords ^^

 

[Ruvion]

I think Rokugan Campaign Setting source book had a feat similiar to yours...Hand of Osano-wo.

Great effort by the way...I remeber many of Eric's Messageboard veterans discussing about whether Ambidexterity had an "off-hand" or not back in the hay days...and whether that signified full strength bonus or half for the much discussed "off-hand". After so much debate, many designers feel that it's balanced to have such a feat I guess.

 

[Crothian]

Rokugan has the prerequistes as : Str 15+, BAB 3+, Ambidexterity, Two weapon Fighting

And I think as a feat it does need some more prerequisites then what you have. At the very least I'd havea str 15+ as it is a feat about strength, so I think only strong characters should be able to qualify.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I definitely wouldn't include TWF as a prereq. someone could happily fight with two weapons with just Ambidex (and take a -4 -4 penalty), and I see Ambidex as the core prereq. After all, it could equally be useful for someone who simply wanted to fight lefthanded for some reason

With Ambidex they already need 15+ dex, and a 15+ str req seems too much. After all, if you don't have a str bonus you probably wouldn't be interested in it anyway!

A BAB 3+ restriction would mean that ranger characters couldn't start with the ability, but frankly I'm not that fussed whether they did or didn't, since there are plenty of other feats out there that are attractive to fighting-types.

I think for my purposes I'll keep the prereqs as I originally had them. I like people having a large choice of feats

 

[CRGreathouse]

--double post--

 

[CRGreathouse]

I don't know... the idea of an orc barbarian with Str 26 dealing more damage with two shortswords than a greataxe disturbs me.

Not IMC!

I do agree, though, that TWF need not be a prerequisite.

 

[med stud]

I like this feat. Consider it ripped off

 

[Darklone]

yihaa

I like it. There may be problems, but since you usually got only two attacks with the off hand weapon, I don't think it's too strong.

If you say you could cleave a lot more guys... Everyone with a good twohanded weapon will have more cleaves. Always. Correct me if I am wrong. Not taken into account the disadvantage of two weapon fighters against DR and the need to get two magical weapons... ok ok, I didn't want to hijack this thread into a discussion if TWF is balanced, so forget this one.

Btw, whoever said it. If you have two weapons in your hand and fight only with one... and you got ambidex... it does not matter which is your offhand or light weapon, you WILL have full Str bonus since you HAVE no offhand with ambidex.

For the prerequisites.... I think they are fine.

 

[Crothian]

The only way this feat gets abused is with really strong character (22+). And those guys need to be feared anyway. I like the idea and don't see why WotC never made it. I've been using a variant since d20 came out and have never had a problem. It actually makes things easier on the player making all his bonuses the same.