Question about double weapons
- Thread starter Vilous
- Start date
It would be if it were a stand alone statement. But you're taking it out of context, and that context, at least to me, adds some question as to whether or not it is refering just to to-attack, or to both to-attack and damage. (that and that its in the FAQ, not the sage, or does he write the FAQ? I honestly don't know)
This is all ground we've covered.
I do know where you're coming from. I am just not agreeing with you that those sources have clarified the issue.
This is all ground we've covered.
I do know where you're coming from. I am just not agreeing with you that those sources have clarified the issue.
Vilous said:It would be if it were a stand alone statement. But you're taking it out of context, and that context, at least to me, adds some question as to whether or not it is refering just to to-attack, or to both to-attack and damage. (that and that its in the FAQ, not the sage, or does he write the FAQ? I honestly don't know)
This is all ground we've covered.
I do know where you're coming from. I am just not agreeing with you that those sources have clarified the issue.
*shrug* I think it's pretty clear from the responses to both of the questions that I listed, that this is the Sages "official" opinion on the way it's intended to work.
If you could get x1.5 damage when using the double weapon to make two attacks, why would the sage have stated "Note, however, that if you're in the habit of always using a double weapon in this fashion you're better off just using a two-handed weapon. " in response to the question about wielding it in two hands?
It seems that you simply don't like the answer you received and are trying to avoid accepting it. If you disagree with the Sage just say so (we all disagree with him at one point or another).
Don't ask for an official answer and then pretend it means something else when you don't like it.
Last edited:
Lela
First Post
Yes, the Sage writes the FAQ. You can also e-mail him if you insist on having the answer exactly. It's my understanding that Skip Williams (The Sage) answers all questions personally.
my house rules...
this was an issue in our group a while back. I'm the DM and IMO while you can gain some extra power into an attack using both hands on a double weapon AS a double weapon, you sacrifice some of your swing distance i.e. there is a bit less momentum buildup. Try taking a baseball bat and swing it holding onto the grip, then put your hands nearer the end and strike with one end. Theres no doubt the damage isn't really on par with a full swing. As such, I see no realistic reason for allowing the 1.5X strength bonus. OTOH, I believe the offhand attack may be a bit more effective than a typical offhand attack, so I have allowed the full strength bonus on the off hand attack. So, in my game, there IS a slight advantage to having a double weapon i.e. you get your full strength bonus on both attacks.
One last point...when he said you'd be better using a regular 2 handed weapon if you were always using the double weapon AS a simple 2 handed weapon, there are SEVERAL reasons that this would be true.
1. its cheaper
2. they typically do more damage
3. as a DM, if someone were doing that regularly with a double weapon and did a critical fumble, I'd say they're a LOT more likely to injure themselves.
this was an issue in our group a while back. I'm the DM and IMO while you can gain some extra power into an attack using both hands on a double weapon AS a double weapon, you sacrifice some of your swing distance i.e. there is a bit less momentum buildup. Try taking a baseball bat and swing it holding onto the grip, then put your hands nearer the end and strike with one end. Theres no doubt the damage isn't really on par with a full swing. As such, I see no realistic reason for allowing the 1.5X strength bonus. OTOH, I believe the offhand attack may be a bit more effective than a typical offhand attack, so I have allowed the full strength bonus on the off hand attack. So, in my game, there IS a slight advantage to having a double weapon i.e. you get your full strength bonus on both attacks.
One last point...when he said you'd be better using a regular 2 handed weapon if you were always using the double weapon AS a simple 2 handed weapon, there are SEVERAL reasons that this would be true.
1. its cheaper
2. they typically do more damage
3. as a DM, if someone were doing that regularly with a double weapon and did a critical fumble, I'd say they're a LOT more likely to injure themselves.
Gromm said:
1 theory is that it's an artifact of Skip always being asked to settle arguments. Any argument that can't be settled by the participants themselves is probably going to involve an inherently ambiguous area of the rules. If it wasn't ambiguous, there would be no reason to start an argument, and certainly no reason to involve Skip.
However, this puts Skip in the invidious position of having to make a decision where the rules don't fully support him. He's in a lose-lose situation: no matter which side he comes down on, there's always going to be something to what the other side says. Online arguments being what they are, the losing side most likely won't accept his decision either; they'll just put on their "Skip disagrees with me, therefore he's wrong" hat. After N years of having to settle arguments, it isn't surprising that it all builds up.
Vilous, I suggest you don't use double weapons until you agree with people who know what they are talking about. Do you think people with high str should add their damage to crossbows too?
Sage and Caliban are correct, you are not. That's ok with everyone as long as you can accept it. Please stop trying to power game, especially when it is against the (clarified) rules.
I tire of people who ask questions on these boards, then ignore all the responses that aren't the one they WANT to hear.
One hand 1x str
two hand 1.5x str
Off hand 0.5 x str
For double weapons, chose which head will receive the 1x str bonus and which will receive the 0.5 str bonus. This does not really matter for a quarterstaff, but for all the exotic double weapons it can matter.
Gnome hook hammer example:
the pick can be 1x str + a 0.5x str hammer
or
the hammer can be 1x str + a 0.5x str pick
or
the hammer can be a 1.5x str two hand attack
or
the pick can be a 1.5x str two hand attack
Double weapons are about allowing more choices in combat, not out damaging a great axe.
Sage and Caliban are correct, you are not. That's ok with everyone as long as you can accept it. Please stop trying to power game, especially when it is against the (clarified) rules.
I tire of people who ask questions on these boards, then ignore all the responses that aren't the one they WANT to hear.
One hand 1x str
two hand 1.5x str
Off hand 0.5 x str
For double weapons, chose which head will receive the 1x str bonus and which will receive the 0.5 str bonus. This does not really matter for a quarterstaff, but for all the exotic double weapons it can matter.
Gnome hook hammer example:
the pick can be 1x str + a 0.5x str hammer
or
the hammer can be 1x str + a 0.5x str pick
or
the hammer can be a 1.5x str two hand attack
or
the pick can be a 1.5x str two hand attack
Double weapons are about allowing more choices in combat, not out damaging a great axe.
Lela
First Post
The nice thing about double weapons really is the choice of attacks.
Hook Hammer:
If your fighting skeletons use two hands on the hammer end.
If your foe has DR then you'll also want to use two hands to a side, with which side you choose depending on the foe.
If your fighting a group of weaker combatants (30 goblins) then you'll likely want to have more attacks to help cut through the crowd, so you would go with both sides.
And each side can have a different enchantment. A Ranger could have each side be Bane to different favored enemies. One can be Icy Burst the other Flaming Burst. Hammer Holy, Hook Lawful. It all depends on your character's needs.
Hook Hammer:
If your fighting skeletons use two hands on the hammer end.
If your foe has DR then you'll also want to use two hands to a side, with which side you choose depending on the foe.
If your fighting a group of weaker combatants (30 goblins) then you'll likely want to have more attacks to help cut through the crowd, so you would go with both sides.
And each side can have a different enchantment. A Ranger could have each side be Bane to different favored enemies. One can be Icy Burst the other Flaming Burst. Hammer Holy, Hook Lawful. It all depends on your character's needs.
Chacal
First Post
Lela said:
You're right, but how often does it come into play ? I guess it depends on the DM, but in my experience it 's not really common.
The last one doesn't strike me as very useful.
How is it better than having two 2-handed weapons, one with Icy, the other Flaming (or any other combination) ?
Chacal
Chacal said:
Well, consider this weapon for a minute.
Spiked chain +2 Keen, Frost burst/+2 Knockback, Flaming
As your target approaches you get a shot with either end. Choose knockback.
Then step toward your target and strike them a couple times with the Frostburst end and once with the Knockback end.
If you hit the guy with knockback he will fly backwards provoking and AoO from either end of the weapon.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
Level Up (A5E)
What would you do to simplify A5E and/or speed up combat?
