Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="eamon" data-source="post: 5017699" data-attributes="member: 51942">I think WotC over-nerfed them.&nbsp; Who's supposed to use these things?&nbsp; If you're really aiming for defenses, just stick a mage's cutting wheel or parrying dagger in your off hand (which tends to be used much less than your primary weapon)For example, you could be running around with a triple-headed flail in one hand and a mage's cutting wheel in the other.&nbsp; Even if the mage's cutting wheel is 5 level's below your primary weapon, you're still almost certain to come out ahead: a triple headed flail (used for most of your attacks) is +3 1d10 vs. the double flail's +2 1d8.Of course, tempests can't really use many of these weapons very well anyhow, since they're not off-hand on one of the ends.&nbsp; One of the best remaining options for them is the double sword.The urgrosh looks attractive, but since both ends are of different types, that secondary end is probably no better than just having a parrying dagger in your offhand.&nbsp; You're unlikely to want to spend twice the feats in specializing for both ends, plus a feat for the weapon itself.I suppose it's only reasonable that the defensive qualities on most of these weapons comes at a cost.&nbsp; But this cost is so steep that I wonder whether anyone will take it - except the double sword for tempests, which is just an easy way to control costs.If I were a beastmaster ranger, say, I'd much rather switch to a bastard sword primary/drow long-knife secondary than any of these options.&nbsp; Sure, it's not defensive.&nbsp; And your secondary weapon may require the mage's enchantment, and may be a +1 behind.&nbsp; But, in return, you get a +3 1d10 weapon primary (which outclasses the double weapons in general) and a thrown option to boot.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="eamon, post: 5017699, member: 51942"] I think WotC over-nerfed them. Who's supposed to use these things? If you're really aiming for defenses, just stick a mage's cutting wheel or parrying dagger in your off hand (which tends to be used much less than your primary weapon) For example, you could be running around with a triple-headed flail in one hand and a mage's cutting wheel in the other. Even if the mage's cutting wheel is 5 level's below your primary weapon, you're still almost certain to come out ahead: a triple headed flail (used for most of your attacks) is +3 1d10 vs. the double flail's +2 1d8. Of course, tempests can't really use many of these weapons very well anyhow, since they're not off-hand on one of the ends. One of the best remaining options for them is the double sword. The urgrosh [I]looks[/I] attractive, but since both ends are of different types, that secondary end is probably no better than just having a parrying dagger in your offhand. You're unlikely to want to spend twice the feats in specializing for both ends, plus a feat for the weapon itself. I suppose it's only reasonable that the defensive qualities on most of these weapons comes at a cost. But this cost is so steep that I wonder whether anyone will take it - except the double sword for tempests, which is just an easy way to control costs. If I were a beastmaster ranger, say, I'd much rather switch to a bastard sword primary/drow long-knife secondary than any of these options. Sure, it's not defensive. And your secondary weapon may require the mage's enchantment, and may be a +1 behind. But, in return, you get a +3 1d10 weapon primary (which outclasses the double weapons in general) and a thrown option to boot. [/QUOTE]

Verification