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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BriarMonkey" data-source="post: 5588731" data-attributes="member: 95387">I have to say I don't follow.  What exactly is it that you are trying to accomplish here?There are already rules, feats, and handling for two-weapon fighting.  In the current iteration, you gain extra attacks (feat dependant after the 1st) and extra damage - not to mention you can use differing weapons in each hand which can grant specific differences (such as differing elemental damages).If I read your set-up correctly, it looks like you are removing the very benefits granted to two-weapon fighting in order to loosen the penalties in the To Hit department (I think - though I'm not sure since you keep terms such as light weapons for use with one's off hand, etc.).  It doesn't make sense, and if I was a player, I'd never use it as it just seems very confusing.Further, if you want to go this route, why are you requiring that one be proficient with all martial weapons?  That means that the fighter auto-gets to use this, but say, a rogue does not (for which the fighter can go sword and board while I'd think a more iconic figure of the rogue would dual wield).If you really have a heartache with the requirement of feats to gain extra attacks through dual-weilding, then there is a much simpler approach - allow everyone to dual wield without feats.  Simply use the existing mechanic and attack scaling.There are a lot of people who grant all characters in their campaigns certain feats automatically, such as Weapon Finesse and Power Attack.  Doing this with two-weapon fighting really wouldn't be a big deal (in my opinion).If I completely missed the point, my apologies, but hopefully something of this helps trigger additional ideas.</blockquote>

Verification