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
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: 544522" data-attributes="member: 3146"><p>Re: Full attacks. This is a pretty much a moot point by 12th level or so. At this point characters should have access to Haste in most battles which will enable them to partial charge and full attack or move and full attack. </p><p></p><p>The non-TWF rogue could have spring attack instead but going into melee with a dragon, it's not going to help much (unless the rogue has boots of striding and springing). If the rogue wants to move, attack, and move he'll probably still usually be a mere five foot step from the dragon's threat range. And if he wants to be further away, he'll have to tumble just like the TWF rogue.</p><p></p><p>The other interesting thing that running the numbers brought up is this: the -2 makes a very big difference when foes have decent ACs (30 or so). In the TWF case, the secondary attacks, hardly make any difference to the average damage per round (although they might make a huge difference to the damage in any given round). Give some appropriate buffing (bless, prayer, bard song, etc) from party members, the TWF rogue might be able to get both primary attacks into "hits more than half the time" range but the secondary attacks are almost guaranteed to be long shots. Consequently, Improved TWF doesn't really yield good dividends unless the rogue is fighting foes with poor ACs. Most of the time, TWF will be almost as good as Imp TWF.</p><p></p><p>Thinking about this, I don't think that rolling TWF and Imp TWF into one feat would really break anything. The one feat for ambidex and TWF (as long as you only use a specific weapon combo) would be a bit much though. Since most characters who use TWF use a specific weapon combo their entire careers (usually picking up weapon focus, EWP, or Weapon finesse early in their careers), there's little reason to take actual TWF and Ambidex. Especially since, in many situations, the benefits from Imp TWF are marginal and even if they're not in the situation a character usually finds himself (a 12th level double sword fighter for instance), it's still no more feats than the character would have spent to get Ambidex and TWF rolled into one. So a character who loads up on the bennies early doesn't suffer if he later decides he'd like imp TWF.</p><p></p><p>Another interesting note from running the numbers: Improved Crit really doesn't do much for a rogue. Maybe it would if the rogue had a keen flaming burst rapier or something but the extra 1d6+5 or so damage from a crit pales in comparison to the 6d6 or so sneak attack the rogue can have at that level.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Elder-Basilisk, post: 544522, member: 3146"] Re: Full attacks. This is a pretty much a moot point by 12th level or so. At this point characters should have access to Haste in most battles which will enable them to partial charge and full attack or move and full attack. The non-TWF rogue could have spring attack instead but going into melee with a dragon, it's not going to help much (unless the rogue has boots of striding and springing). If the rogue wants to move, attack, and move he'll probably still usually be a mere five foot step from the dragon's threat range. And if he wants to be further away, he'll have to tumble just like the TWF rogue. The other interesting thing that running the numbers brought up is this: the -2 makes a very big difference when foes have decent ACs (30 or so). In the TWF case, the secondary attacks, hardly make any difference to the average damage per round (although they might make a huge difference to the damage in any given round). Give some appropriate buffing (bless, prayer, bard song, etc) from party members, the TWF rogue might be able to get both primary attacks into "hits more than half the time" range but the secondary attacks are almost guaranteed to be long shots. Consequently, Improved TWF doesn't really yield good dividends unless the rogue is fighting foes with poor ACs. Most of the time, TWF will be almost as good as Imp TWF. Thinking about this, I don't think that rolling TWF and Imp TWF into one feat would really break anything. The one feat for ambidex and TWF (as long as you only use a specific weapon combo) would be a bit much though. Since most characters who use TWF use a specific weapon combo their entire careers (usually picking up weapon focus, EWP, or Weapon finesse early in their careers), there's little reason to take actual TWF and Ambidex. Especially since, in many situations, the benefits from Imp TWF are marginal and even if they're not in the situation a character usually finds himself (a 12th level double sword fighter for instance), it's still no more feats than the character would have spent to get Ambidex and TWF rolled into one. So a character who loads up on the bennies early doesn't suffer if he later decides he'd like imp TWF. Another interesting note from running the numbers: Improved Crit really doesn't do much for a rogue. Maybe it would if the rogue had a keen flaming burst rapier or something but the extra 1d6+5 or so damage from a crit pales in comparison to the 6d6 or so sneak attack the rogue can have at that level. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Two-Weapon Fighting
Top