Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="the_bruiser" data-source="post: 1491749" data-attributes="member: 6126">It's worked well, actually.  I have a pretty decent amount of both empirical and statistical/analytical evidence that I think shows in a compelling fashion that the two-weapons is far weaker than the weapon/shield style, much less two-handed weapon style.  This is *partially* negated in normal campaigns by flat bonuses to weapon damage, such as flaming, shocking, etc., but the style remains clearly inferior even taking this into account.  In my campaign in particular, however, with few magic weapons of any power whatsoever (at 13th level we now have +2 weapons), even this edge-back is removed.  This feat makes up for part of that.  Note that straight rogues cannot take this feat - you have to invest 4 levels or more in fighter or ranger to get this.  Basically, rogues' sneak attack damage works like a built-in damage according to my paragraph above, and as such rogues don't need the relative +2 to be effective with two-weapon style - in fact, in my experience that style is clearly superior for rogues.  So, anyway, it's worked great <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />.  In fact, including cohorts, we have an amazing balance of combat styles - core charactersfighter w/ two-hand weaponranger/cleric w/ weapon/shieldpaladin (chaotic good variant) w/ two-weapon style (a special exception was made to class rules for this character, and I allowed him to get the feat)rogue/wizard w/ double weapon (quarterstaff)cohort/NPCsfighter/rogue w/ two-weapon stylefighter w/ rangedmonk NPC w/ unarmedoccasional visiting charactersswashbuckler w/ one-handed weapon (and empty hand)ranger/shugenja w/ two-handed weaponSo we cover pretty much every style I can think of.</blockquote>

Verification