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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Elder-Basilisk" data-source="post: 544258" data-attributes="member: 3146">Here's a problem with all improvements to two weapon fighting styles that none of their proponents on this thread have yet grappled with:Two weapon fighting is not just two single handed weapons.Characters who choose to dual wield a single-handed weapon and spiked shield or shield of bashing and characters who choose to dual wield a two handed weapon and armor spikes also benefit from these arrangements. So do characters who wield double weapons but very few of those are superior to paired single handed weapons (and many of those aren't far superior).With this modified feat available, there would be very little reason for every high level fighter not to spend a single feat to be able to make several more attacks with a shield bash or armor spikes--whether or not they were set up as a dual wielding character. At the cost of a single feat, I would expect the difference between high level fighters not to be whether or not they dual wielded but rather what they dual wielded.It is also necessary to consider the effect of changing dual wielding requirements on class balance. A change as dramatic as the one proposed enables every rogue to double his/her sneak attack damage on every full attack for the cost of a single feat. As a previous poster demonstrated, the opportunity cost for a rogue to master the dual wielding style is far far higher under the current rules.As is demonstrated above, it is necessary for a rogue who really wants to master two weapon fighting to devote almost all of his feats to it. And it should be necessary. A 20th level rogue with all the dual wielding feats gets an extra 30d6 sneak attack damage if all his off-hand attacks land. That's a pretty big payoff.Also, consider my contribution to the 12th level rogue debate under the current rules:B. lvl 11/1 human rogue/fighter Iconic Spread:Str 13, Dex 18 (+3 stat boosts 20 w/gloves of dex), Con 14, int 12, wis 8, cha 10 Ambidexterity, 2-Weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus-Shortsword, Improved Critical: shortsword, Weapon Finesse-Shortsword, Improved 2-Weapon Fighting, (Close quarters combat or some other feat).Items: +3 keen shortsword, +2 Sure Striking shortsword, Buckler (same as rogue A).The character's attacks are:+18/+13 (1d6+4, 15-20/x2) or +16/+11 (as before) and +15/+10 (1d6+2 17-20/x2)When able to sneak attack (flanking, invisible, or flatfooded opponent--most of which amount to at least a +2 to hit so I'll figure that in) this character manages the following average damage against AC 30:Atk +18/+12 for (1d6+4, +6d6 15-20/x2) and +17/+12 for (1d6+2 +6d6 17-20/x2)Using the following formula: average damage per attack=(chance to hit (AB-30+20)x.05) x (average damage of weapon+sneak attack) + (chance to crit ((20-lowest crit #)x .05) x chance to confirm (30-AB)x.05)) x crit damage (weapon damage) the results come out to:Average damage per round Primary hand, primary attack:12.5Secondary hand, primary attack:4.556Primary hand, secondary attack:9.564Secondary hand, secondary attack:2.735Total average damage per full attack action: 29.352Against AC 25, it comes out to: 57.85 damage per round.Against AC 20, it comes out to: 86.71Rogue A (with the rapier) in the same situation comes up with:AC 30: 27.88AC 25: 44.42AC 20: 57.58So in the AC 30 scenario, two weapon fighting nets the rogue about one and a half points of damage per round. In the AC 25 scenario, however, it nets the rogue 13.5 points of damage/round and in the AC 20 example, it nets the rogue a whopping 29 points of damage per round. I'd call that several feats well spent.My example rogue multi-ed to fighter but only to pick up Improved Critical: shortsword and Improved TWF at 12th level. Had we selected 15th level as our artificial point of comparison, it would not have been necessary.If all of the TWF feats were combined into one, this character wouldn't have to multiclass to fighter in order to get Imp Crit at 12th level. In fact, the character would still have a feat free for Iron Will. If he multiclassed into fighter, the character could be a two weapon fighter, with improved critical and have expert tactician to boot.Now, for a more min-maxed character, try this one on for size:Same stats as above:Ambidexterity, TWF, weapon finesse: rapier, weapon finesse:shield bash [Shields count as a LIGHT off hand weapon], Shield Expert, Improved Two weapon fighting.Equipment: +3 keen rapier (15-20 threat range), +3 large darkwood shield of bashing.He's got a three to five more points of AC than A and his attack bonus is only one point less. The extra crit range on A's rapier only gives him about one point of extra average damage/hit so not having improved crit isn't really a big deal for this character. And judging from the previous results, this character should dramatically outdamage A against ACs 25 and lower.Now, just imagine that all of the two weapon fighting feats were condensed into one. This character could now afford to get weapon focus for both his rapier and his shield--all without multiclassing into fighter.I don't think it's silly that multiclassing to fighter should be an attractive option to people who want to fight well. If single classed rogues can get all of the combat feats they want without multiclassing at all, why should anyone play fighters? The same is true for single classed paladins, rangers, etc. If it's possible for any character to fight at peak efficiency in their chosen class without multi-classing to fighter, what does the fighter class exist for?</blockquote>

Verification