Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Some ideas: Two weapon fighting
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Elder-Basilisk" data-source="post: 231539" data-attributes="member: 3146"><p>Both of these rule changes taken together will dramatically reduce the relative effectiveness of two handed weapons. Personally, I think this is a bad thing since I rather appreciate that in 3e, warriors with greatswords are fearsome brutes capable of dealing out huge amounts of damage rather than fools who just don't realize that they'd kick twice as much [edited] dual wielding longswords or with bladesong (as it was in 2e).</p><p></p><p>Depending upon how you deal with the cover granted by a shield, it may not effect the balance between weapon and shield and two weapon styles. (Although the dual wield weapon and spiked shield model will become insanely effective). Having a shield grant cover could be a real pain if you give the enemy as much cover as the PC gets and even more painful if it is directional (thus allowing the enemy to get around it with his 5 foot step). Personally, I wouldn't want to deal with any more directional cover bonusses than I already have in the game (the shield spell and tower shield--at least tower shields don't see as much use).</p><p></p><p>Removing the to-hit penalty from the primary weapon will definitely increase the damage from dual wielding characters. If you remove the "2nd weapon must be light" and "1/2 str bonus to damage on 2nd weapon", you will create an environment where dual wielding bastard swords is clearly the best way to deal damage. (Which seems rather silly to me).</p><p></p><p>Perhaps most significantly, by increasing the damage dealing capabilities of your PCs, you will give them significant advantages against monsters of their CR. Trolls are supposed to dish out more damage per round than most PCs can. If PCs with an 18 strength, two bastard swords, and weapon specialization are dealing out 2d10+12 points of damager per round (or 3d10+18 at 6th level--more if Barbarian levels, rage and bull's strength are called in) then you will have to throw more or tougher foes at them in order to challenge them. This will really increase the deadliness of your campaign (for PCs and villains alike).</p><p></p><p>Of course, none of this will hurt your game if your players are the kind of players who play fighters with a 12 strength, 14 dex, and 8 con but a 17 charisma. If they're powergamers though be prepared for a dramatic increase in powerful dual-wielders--either that or a dramatic increase in the amount of shield facings you have to keep track of in combat.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Elder-Basilisk, post: 231539, member: 3146"] Both of these rule changes taken together will dramatically reduce the relative effectiveness of two handed weapons. Personally, I think this is a bad thing since I rather appreciate that in 3e, warriors with greatswords are fearsome brutes capable of dealing out huge amounts of damage rather than fools who just don't realize that they'd kick twice as much [edited] dual wielding longswords or with bladesong (as it was in 2e). Depending upon how you deal with the cover granted by a shield, it may not effect the balance between weapon and shield and two weapon styles. (Although the dual wield weapon and spiked shield model will become insanely effective). Having a shield grant cover could be a real pain if you give the enemy as much cover as the PC gets and even more painful if it is directional (thus allowing the enemy to get around it with his 5 foot step). Personally, I wouldn't want to deal with any more directional cover bonusses than I already have in the game (the shield spell and tower shield--at least tower shields don't see as much use). Removing the to-hit penalty from the primary weapon will definitely increase the damage from dual wielding characters. If you remove the "2nd weapon must be light" and "1/2 str bonus to damage on 2nd weapon", you will create an environment where dual wielding bastard swords is clearly the best way to deal damage. (Which seems rather silly to me). Perhaps most significantly, by increasing the damage dealing capabilities of your PCs, you will give them significant advantages against monsters of their CR. Trolls are supposed to dish out more damage per round than most PCs can. If PCs with an 18 strength, two bastard swords, and weapon specialization are dealing out 2d10+12 points of damager per round (or 3d10+18 at 6th level--more if Barbarian levels, rage and bull's strength are called in) then you will have to throw more or tougher foes at them in order to challenge them. This will really increase the deadliness of your campaign (for PCs and villains alike). Of course, none of this will hurt your game if your players are the kind of players who play fighters with a 12 strength, 14 dex, and 8 con but a 17 charisma. If they're powergamers though be prepared for a dramatic increase in powerful dual-wielders--either that or a dramatic increase in the amount of shield facings you have to keep track of in combat. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Some ideas: Two weapon fighting
Top