Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zyrusticae" data-source="post: 3546422" data-attributes="member: 43493">Nah. Shields are actually superior in terms of survivability, even in the state they are now. Remember that an increase of 1 AC reduces an opponent's chance to hit by 5%. They have to roll that much higher to hit. Damage does not help when it comes to hitting an opponent, whereas a shield prevents damage entirely. An enchanted tower shield can reduce an enemy's chance to hit by as much as 40%. I imagine Saga Edition has some kind of mechanic to make wielding a one-handed weapon without anything in the off-hand more desirable. Perhaps a bonus to hit because of its ease of use? A bonus to AC wouldn't be redundant in SAGA edition, as shields don't exist there, but it would be in D&D, where shields would be superior to a simple AC bonus. Hmm.Edit: If you're referring to using two short swords in each hand, I don't see the problem. Both hands get proportionate damage increases, so they're really almost exactly the same in terms of power level (with the exception that using two weapons requires a feat). Personally, I'm not a really big fan of dual-wielding in the first place, but that's just me. It's still a viable tactic, either way.</blockquote>