| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| pandoria02-11-05, 07:37 AM | I was wondering what style of fighting was best 1 weapon or 2 weapon fighting and why, and what weapons everyone was using and why? Im starting a new char human 4fighter/3ranger/6rogue and i wanted to here from the board before I made my choice. Thanks. |
| Draco Strang02-11-05, 07:58 AM | Well, honestly, do what you want man. Before we can help you, we'd need your levels and race, preferably. That can influence decisions. |
| murte02-11-05, 08:52 AM | Wielding a two handed weapon versus wielding a one handed with a light off end up with about the same damage output. It all comes down to bonuses, especially strength. There are several folks here who have damage calculators in their sigs, try one or more of them out. |
| kjenks02-11-05, 08:58 AM | Wielding a two-handed weapon does more damage on average, especially when you get only one attack or you use Power Attack. TWF takes longer but gives you more flexibility in dealing with Damage Reduction, like adamantine in one hand and cold iron in the other with silver armor spikes just in case. |
| Sunrider02-14-05, 06:39 AM | THW makes you far less vulnerable to (and far better at) manoeuvres such as Disarm or Sunder. Also, you get more out of Power Attacking, don't need as much Dex, have an easier time smashing objects, spend less feats, do more damage on a Spring Attack or Whirlwind Attack, get more out of Cleave, have the option of using a reach weapon and have an easier time getting through damage reduction you can't ignore. TWF is less damaging, less likely to hit, more vulnerable to just about every manoeuvre, has a harder time against damage reduction, requires full attacks to be any use at all, requires you to balance Str and Dex...definitely an inferior fighting style. THW has so many advantages over other styles of fighting there is little reason at the moment for a fighter to use anything else. |
| Dracspero02-14-05, 12:05 PM | TWF is better for someone with a high Dex and low Str. It is probably the way to go with your fighter/ranger/rogue (especially for rogue...more attacks = more sneak attack damage). |
| DarknessEternal02-14-05, 12:39 PM | Two Weapon Fighting's main advantage comes when you have some additive bonus that comes entirely from having more attacks. Examples of these are Sneak Attack, Arcane Strike, and Blades of Flame. In those cases, hitting more than once is vastly better than hitting once with a higher strength bonus. |
| Xeviat-DM02-14-05, 12:51 PM | TWF is better for someone with a high Dex and low Str. It is probably the way to go with your fighter/ranger/rogue (especially for rogue...more attacks = more sneak attack damage). In a thread of mine, I have shown this to be incorrect. Assuming the high dex low str character uses a rapier/MW buckler or light shield combo, they come out on top. Sure, the TWFer will do more damage than the rapier/buckler fighter, but the rapier/buckler fighter will have much higher AC and a better weapon for the same cost of the TWFer's two weapons. And assuming the high dex low str character can get a two handed weapon which can be finessed (like the spiked chain), they are typically better than a TWFer as built with the current scheme of feats. For example, a +5 weapon (50,3xx) costs about as much as a +3 weapon (18,3xx) and a +4 weapon (32,3xx). Sure, the TWFer can stack on the elemental enhancements, but that greatly reduces their to hit which is the only thing that is important to a high dex low str elemental enhancement wielding warrior. To the original poster, talk to your DM. If you would prefer to have your character be a 2 weapon fighter, discuss with them the nature of the fighting style. I suggest the following changes: Non-proficiency penalty is -4 to the off hand, plus -4/-4 to both hands if the off hand weapon is not light, -2/-2 is the offhand weapon is light. So, for example, a character without Two Weapon Fighting with a light weapon in their off hand will attack at -2/-6. Characters always get an equal number of offhand attacks as onhand attacks. Two-Weapon Fighting is more like ambidexterity, and may get a name switch in my games. It removes the -4 offhand penalty (removing this penalty from skill checks as well). You can attack with each weapon with your full BAB, minus the appropriate penalties. Either weapon may be light to gain the reduced penalties. Two-Weapon Defense scales with BAB. It grants +1 shield AC (+2 when fighting defensively or using total defense) at first. At +6 BAB, it increases to +2 (+4) AC. At +11 BAB it changes to +3 (+6) AC. And at +16 BAB it changes to +4 (+8) AC. Improved Two-Weapon Fighting further reduces the penalties. It cuts the penalties for using Two-Weapon Fighting in half. Penalties for using two one-handed weapons becomes -2/-2, and the penalties for using a light weapon in your off-hand becomes -1/-1. Dual Strike is another feat that will be added, possibly at +6 BAB. It allows you to attack with both weapons as a volley, making one attack roll and applying it to both attack modifiers to determine success. As a volley, only one weapon can apply precision or critical damage. One of my goals is to create two distinctive styles of two weapon fighting. I want it to be plausable to use Two-weapon fighting without taking the ambidexterity feat. One style (represented by rapier/dagger) uses the light off hand weapon as a defensive and opportunistic weapon. Such characters typically do not attack with the weapon, they use it to perform feints and to take attacks of opportunity and to defend. They should be able to take two-weapon defense, gain additional attacks of opportunity, and improved feint should be made to change feint to an attack action. The -4 offhand non-ambidextrous penalty should not affect them too much, since all they use the hand for is feinting and allowing for TWD. The other style of two-weapon fighting is more aggressive (best represented by Drizzt). The warrior wields two equally sized weapons (typically paired weapons). They attack with both weapons, and use both weapons to attack and defend at the same time. This style is more difficult, and does require more feats. Sneak attack does become an iffy issue here. I have been considering removing sneak attack's ability to sneak attack while flanking, but it still makes ranged two weapon fighting throwers insane in the first round if they win initiative. |
| DevilKiller02-14-05, 06:49 PM | If you think you're capable of thinking tactically and want to have a lot of options in combat I suggest picking up a kusari-gama from Oriental Adventures. It can be used as a two-handed weapon with reach or two weapons without reach for TWF. If it isn't available or doesn't appeal to you then you could always do TWF with a spiked chain and armor spikes or improved unarmed strikes. With any of these setups you can choose each round whether to use TWF or THF. Since THF doesn't require a lot of feats it is a style you can always fall back on if TWF isn't working out for some reason. If you can get a good Str score along with enough dex for TWF that's ideal since it will help your two-handed damage and trip attacks a lot. Else your reach attacks will be mostly be for nuisance damage or finessed disarms. If you think chain weapons are goofy or abusive you could always do twin daggers or throwing axes with TWF and Rapid Shot. It would cost a lot of feats and be less effective than some builds, but it might be fun if only you can explain where you stash all those axes... Anyhow, rogues and TWF go together like peanut butter and jelly. |
| Rulebook02-14-05, 07:33 PM | in my opinion, two weapon fighting is useless in the hands of anybody but a fighter, where they can weapon specialize to help the damage deficit. two handed fighting IMO is the best. you dont NEED versatility in crunching DR because you can just smash through it. and at higher levels, the power attack is just pure hardcore. mix that with classes like the Frenzied berzerker that get greater power attack and its just sick. 3:1 tradeoff is -nice- |
| Razoreface02-14-05, 08:46 PM | Wielding a two handed weapon versus wielding a one handed with a light off end up with about the same damage output. When you get into statistics, there's a point where this is exactly true. THW and TWF are basically perfectly balanced in terms of attacks, attack rates, and total damages. There are ways to skew the mathematical stats, but when you're counting full attack vs full attack, it's basically dead even. Wielding a two-handed weapon does more damage on average, especially when you get only one attack or you use Power Attack. This is one of those ways. When you have a single attack per round, even if you have a TWF feat that lets you do one attack with each, a little PA on a THW throws the damage comparison so far off it's amazing, cause the THW gets 2 for one, and the TWF is basically reverse.. 1:1 on the primary, and 1:0 on the offhand. Small bonuses like specs and magic bonuses push it toward TWF, because cheap easy bonuses count twice. Rogues who SA a lot.. no comparing that at all. When you want absolute versatility and you're a Fighter with feats to burn, it's bastard sword and buckler, TWF, PA and improved shield bashes. When it's better to TWF, you can. When you need the shield defense, you can. When you want one solid hit, you just whip that bastard in two hands, and suck up the tiny penalty for wearing a buckler. |
| DevilKiller02-14-05, 08:53 PM | in my opinion, two weapon fighting is useless in the hands of anybody but a fighter, where they can weapon specialize to help the damage deficit. Even a 3rd level rogue's sneak attack does significantly more extra damage than a 12th level fighter's attack with Greater Weapon Specialization. Sure, it only does it against certain enemies in certain situations, but that's why it is balanced. Higher levek monks also have a high enough base damage to make unarmed TWF quite effective. Of course rangers, the classic TWF class, also get damage bonuses against their favored enemies. Even spellcasters can unleash certain melee attack and melee touch based spells more rapidly using TWF, so almost everybody can use it. To say TWF is only useful for one class is just shortsighted IMO. |
| Razoreface02-14-05, 09:47 PM | Also wicked cool for Clerics properly powered up and with the Strength domain.. all those little bonuses done twice over. |
| Sunrider02-15-05, 01:34 AM | Only works if you can get in full attacks. A smart THW fighter would just use Spring Attack to trade attacks one for one; the larger weapon combined with Power Attack would result in much more damage per hit than TWF. If the THW fighter is using a reach weapon and the TWF fighter doesn't have Spring Attack, the THW fighter now has two attacks per round versus the TWF fighter's single attack. Given the vulnerability of the smaller weapons to Disarm and Sunder, the THW fighter would probably start the fight by taking out one or both of the TWF fighter's weapons; that done, the fight is essentially over. |
| Santrilla02-15-05, 05:19 AM | What are people's thoughts on rangers and TWF? I hear discussion about fighters and rogues, but it seems silly to ignore a class specifically devoted to TWF when discussing it. |
| pandoria02-15-05, 01:12 PM | Thanks for all the info,you guys really know your stuff,Ive done alot of reading and thinkin about this and I decided on goin with 1 weapon fighting and Im gunna use a greatsword or fullblade with both hands and work my way up to whirlwind,improved critical,and great cleave,and Im not takin any lvls in ranger. I'm goin with human fighter4/rogue6/and maybe cleric or frenzied berzerker,or expert tactition,I got time to decide. Thanks again |
| CaoSlayer02-15-05, 02:13 PM | ummmm, actually this people didnt got a point: you have rogue levels. with sneak attack, the two weapons style excels the THW style, because when flanking, you are dealing an extra +3d6 per attack, so with one or two extra attacks you are going to deal +6d6 damage than with the two handed style... now get a flaming/frost/ect weapon and you will deal ever more damage. The key of the TWF it is when you deal other damage beyond the str + weapon mod. then this style outfits it. know if you are concerned about the penalti, then take levels at the tempest prestige class and you will be able to ever wield two bastard swords without a penalty to hit. |
| Razoreface02-15-05, 10:18 PM | A smart THW fighter would just use Spring Attack to trade attacks one for one; the larger weapon combined with Power Attack would result in much more damage per hit than TWF. If the THW fighter is using a reach weapon and the TWF fighter doesn't have Spring Attack, the THW fighter now has two attacks per round versus the TWF fighter's single attack. Eh.. if the TWFer tries it sure, I sort of mentioned that on the comparing single attacks, but a THW guy spring attacking and moving back with one attack, vs TWFer who stands and delivers on five, six, seven attacks, he's going to do a lot more damage. Take a lot more, but do a lot more, and maybe drop the enemy before he can hit back. When it's not tactically that good of an idea, it's not something to be doing. A "smart" THW guy may have problems finding situations where he can trade attacks one for one. How often does one fighter face off against one enemy? What are people's thoughts on rangers and TWF? I hear discussion about fighters and rogues, but it seems silly to ignore a class specifically devoted to TWF when discussing it. Ranger TWFers are like Fighter TWFers, except they tend to be a little less versatile in fighting, and don't have quite the durability. Rangers have TWF because it's stereotypical, not because they're really all that good at it. |
| pandoria02-16-05, 09:11 AM | Quote: THW guy may have problems finding situations where he can trade attacks one for one. How often does one fighter face off against one enemy? Thats what whirlwind and great cleave are for. |
| Nyferto02-16-05, 09:46 AM | Someone mentioned Shield Bash with a buckler - can't do it. Use both at the same time with a Bastard Sword, Unarmed attacks and Armour Spikes with a Light Spiked Shield. |
| DragonsArt02-16-05, 10:56 AM | The problem with THF is this... you have one weapon. That has inherant limitations. Let's assume two fighters with exact strength of 20 (+5): +5 Greatsword with shocking, flaming, frost, sonic and acid (+5) That's 2d6+5+5d6 for an average of 7 + 5 + 21 = 33 + 7 (str+1/2) = 40 When power attacking for -/+5 he would do 33 + 7 (str+1/2) + 10 = 50 The same fighter with TWF with similiar weapons: 2 +5 Short swords of shocking, flaming, frost, sonic and acid (+5) For a single attack, that's: 4 + 5 + 21 = 30 + 5 (str) = 35 (5 points less) For his second attack, that's 4 + 5 + 21 = 30 + 2 ( 1/2 str) = 32 So for only making two attacks, that's 67 points of damage WITHOUT power attacking for -/+5, which effectively makes you (relatively) 15% less likely to hit over TWF. The downside is: cost of weapons. Now... let's give the fighter 3 levels of rogue and the rest fighter for a BAB hit of 1 and put him into a flanking position: For a single attack, that's: 4 + 5 + 21 + 7= 37 + 5 (str) = 43 (3 points more) For his second attack, that's 4 + 5 + 21 +7 = 37 + 2 ( 1/2 str) = 39 So for making 2 attacks, the TWF now does 82 points. Again, with a (relative) 15% better chance of connecting. Now... let's go crazy: 20th level fighter using Greatsword: BAB: +20/+15/+10/+5 He's going to use Power attack at full to maximize the THF style. We'll bump STR up to 24 for both (+7). Weapons are the same. His attacks attacks are at +5 (weapon) +7 (str) -5 Power attack = +7: +27/+22/+17/+12 Damage is: 2d6+5+5d6 for an average of 7 + 5 + 21 + 10 (str+1/2) = 43 + 10 = 53 2d6+5+5d6 for an average of 7 + 5 + 21 + 10 (str+1/2) = 43 + 10 = 53 2d6+5+5d6 for an average of 7 + 5 + 21 + 10 (str+1/2) = 43 + 10 = 53 2d6+5+5d6 for an average of 7 + 5 + 21 + 10 (str+1/2) = 43 + 10 = 53 Total: 212 if all attacks hit Now, the TWF 17th level fighter/3rd rogue using short swords: BAB: +19/+14/+9/+4 Weve bumped up STR but left everything else the same. Each attack is at +5 weapon + 7 str -2 twf = +10) His attacks attacks are at with TWF/ITWF and GTF: +29/+29/+24/+24/+19/+19/+14 Damage is: Prim: 4 + 5 + 21 + 7 + 7 = 44 Sec: 4 + 5 + 21 + 7 + 3 = 40 Prim: 4 + 5 + 21 + 7 + 7 = 44 Sec: 4 + 5 + 21 + 7 + 3 = 40 Prim: 4 + 5 + 21 + 7 + 7 = 44 Sec: 4 + 5 + 21 + 7 + 3 = 40 Prim: 4 + 5 + 21 + 7 + 7 = 44 Total: 296 if all attacks hit Weapon focus, specialization, etc. are inconsequential since they affect both builds almost identically - if anything a +1 to both short swords would actually give double the increase in odds since it applies to double the hits. Weapon specialization benefits TWF in a similiar way... giving a total of +14 to the max damage for TWF and +8 to the THF build. The main disadvantages are: * TWF uses more feats, so theoretically, the THF will be more versatile... choosing things like spring attack, improved disarm, sunder, etc. * Two weapons cost twice as much, that's money the THF can spend on other things like extra armor magic, resistances, etc. |
| Razoreface02-16-05, 02:32 PM | The downside is: cost of weapons. 200,000 gp is one hell of a down side.. that inherently skews your math. If you want to actually compare them equally, you have to put in an equal investment. Doing it this way can't help but skew weapon damage over to TWF, because you don't include what that extra 200,000 can go to on the THW guy. +11 strength only costs 173,500 gp. He's going to use Power attack at full to maximize the THF style. That's basically.. dumb. Besides, there's improved power attack somewhere. I'll explain why in a minute. +27/+22/+17/+12 2d6+5+5d6 for an average of 7 + 5 + 21 + 10 (str+1/2) = 43 + 10 = 53 2d6+5+5d6 for an average of 7 + 5 + 21 + 10 (str+1/2) = 43 + 10 = 53 2d6+5+5d6 for an average of 7 + 5 + 21 + 10 (str+1/2) = 43 + 10 = 53 2d6+5+5d6 for an average of 7 + 5 + 21 + 10 (str+1/2) = 43 + 10 = 53 Total: 212 if all attacks hit +29/+29/+24/+24/+19/+19/+14 Prim: 4 + 5 + 21 + 7 + 7 = 44 Sec: 4 + 5 + 21 + 7 + 3 = 40 Prim: 4 + 5 + 21 + 7 + 7 = 44 Sec: 4 + 5 + 21 + 7 + 3 = 40 Prim: 4 + 5 + 21 + 7 + 7 = 44 Sec: 4 + 5 + 21 + 7 + 3 = 40 Prim: 4 + 5 + 21 + 7 + 7 = 44 Total: 296 if all attacks hit This is the other skew. Mathematical average on diminishing attacks. The best forumulas for this kind of math involve endless strings of percentages. You have to essentially pick a likely average AC for a level 20 guy to be fighting, and apply the percentage chance of hitting that AC for each attack to the damage for that attack. If the AC is 30, and the attack is at +20 it's a 50% chance, so the average damage that you take and add to the potential total is 50%. If you just "assume" all the attacks hit.. you're playing an incredible favortism to the person who will have the most attacks. Totalling up 296 vs 212, is just showing how much you want to skew it. To do it right, you also have to have directly comparable investment into weapons, and establish solid parameters. I'm just going to paste this from a very old thread, because I'm too lazy to come up with my own numbers, and think actual mathematical comparison is really a waste of my time, so I don't want to spend much on it. Build is a Fighter 17/Rogue 3, in both cases. What, you thought I was going to give a 2d6 advantage to the TWF guy? Jeez. It requires minor tweaking of the sheet of numbers I have already. A haste attack will be applied. If you're level 20 and can't find a way to haste yourself, you suck. It's already on the numbers I have anyway. Strength is 26. I don't feel like changing it, it's a lot of work. Weapons is 200,000 gp only. Because that's what is on this sheet, and it's the only way to have it a proper comparison. That means a +10 weapon vs two +7's. It still somewhat weighs to the TWF anyway. The compared weapons are a +5 Greatsword, Vicious, Flaming, Frost, Shocking, Thundering, and +5 Shortswords, Vicious, Thundering. I should note, that Vicious is a great enhancement for people who don't make 9 attacks per round, though the extra 4d6 isn't that much more, it still hurts. But the guy who did the numbers originally wanted both sides as basically equal in terms of weapons as possible, so both have Vicious. Average damage of the greatsword is 7 (sword), 16 (strength), 5 (magic), 4 (greater spec), 7 (sneak attack), 21 (elements and vicious, though I personally think it's stupid to do the elements at full values, because at level 20 you should be fighting stuff that's resistant). Total average is 56. Average shortsword damage is 3.5 (sword), 8 and 4 (strength), 5 (magic), 4 (greater spec), 7 (sneak attack), 10.5 (magic). Total average is 38 and 34. It looks like a +4 or +3 sword with more elemental damage will do more, but each +1 is 10% total damage. +5 with +3d6 is actually 2 more total average than +4 with +4d6. Their attacks are 34/34/29/24/19, and 31/31/31-o/26/26-o/21/21-o/19. The set AC is 34. If you want it different, I can do a different one. Going to 36 or higher effectively removes the last attack from the TWF guy. THW guy has 95% (hard cap) chance to hit with first and second, 80%, 55%, and 30%. TWF guy has 90%/90%/90%o/65%/65%o/40%/40%o/15%. The TWF guy's percentage average damage is 36.1/36.1/32.3/26.6/23.8/17.1/15.3/7.6 and totals at 194.9 (if you're really curious, changing it to +4 and adding frost makes it 192.67) The THW guy's percentage average damage is 57/57/48/33/18 and totals at 198.8. You can see that they're basically identical.. four points out of nearly 200 isn't significant. If you do a power attack, the average on a full attack actually drops, giving only 196 average at -5/+10. That changes of course, depending on the AC. Lower AC and you'd actually benefit from it. If you invest more money into the TWF guy's swords, an additional ~60k and another +1d6 to each, and you just top out the THW guy at 213.62. Double the THW guy's money and get the full +5 blah blah +6d6 swords and you get in at 251.07. But at that point I'd insist on most of that 200k going into more strength bonuses. Since 34 is achievable, starting with 18 and investing less than 200k, I think 32 isn't asking too much, and still comes in about 50k less gold than the two +10 swords. That brings the THW guy to 242. Almost equal investment, 34 strength, goes 257.3. Equal investment, pretty much equal results. For the feat crazy, the TWF guy can invest an extra five feats and get exotic bastard, greater focus and spec in it, and up the total average by 6.5. Or save a feat and do a longsword, for 3.25. (which really shows that when you have enough attacks and additions to damage, your actual weapon dice is basically pointless... changing the greatsword to a greataxe, or even a bastard sword, only changes the total by a few hitpoints. Even going to a longsword only takes 10 points off the 198.) Everyone who read through all that, raise your hand. Now lean to the left until you fall. Feel better? The guys who wrote the system took a lot of time, and did a very good job, of making sure that the different ways of fighting were very balanced. |
| Nightwing_2202-16-05, 03:22 PM | Two-weapon fighting can be just as good as Two-handed fighting. If you are going to go TWF you will likely want/need the following feats: TWF*, ITWF, GTWF - If you are going to fight with two-weapons get as many attacks as posible (requires a high dex) Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Improved Critical - Choose one weapon like the Shortsword or Handaxe and use it in both hands. Using two different weapons results in feat bonus problems. Combat Expertise, Weapon Focus, Sense Weakness** - The main defecit of TWF is the fact that you do less damage in each blow, making it difficult to damage DR heavy creatures. Sense Weakness ignores 5 points of DR on any creature you hit with your Weapon Focus Weapon. This is a good plan. Two-Weapon Defense(TWD), ITWD***, GTWD*** - Because you lack a shield and cannot wear medium or heavy armor, due to your Ranger combat style not allowing it, you will be seriously short on defense. (requires a high dex) * Ranger Bonus Feat ** Draconomicon *** Complete Warrior I would recommend this build: Rogue1-2>Ranger1-3>Fighter1-4>Rogue3-6 Level 1 - Combat Expertise, FEAT Level 3 - Track*, Weapon Focus (XXX) Level 4 - Combat Style (TWF)* Level 5 - Endurance* Level 6 - FEAT*, Sense Weakness Level 7 - ITWF* Level 9 - Weapon Specialization (XXX)*, FEAT Level 12 - FEAT (Cannot select GTWF due to low BAB) * Fighter Feat/Ranger bonus Feat XXX - Chosen Weapon Based on this loose build: Diehard, TWD, Improved Critical or a number of other featsand other feats can be selected and still have a very vialble Two-Weapon Fighter. A Two-handed fighter build comprises solely of Power Attack and the same Weapon Focus, Specialization and Improved Critical feats. This leaves many feats open for Cleave, Diehard, and other power attack based feats. |
| Razoreface02-16-05, 04:56 PM | Choose one weapon like the Shortsword or Handaxe and use it in both hands. Using two different weapons results in feat bonus problems. And I thought nobody else used handaxes for TWFing. :) A Two-handed fighter build comprises solely of Power Attack and the same Weapon Focus, Specialization and Improved Critical feats. This leaves many feats open for Cleave, Diehard, and other power attack based feats. That's basically my real problem (non-group specific problem, anyway) with TWFing.. most semi-optimized TWF builds are going to be basically the same feats, give or take a couple. When my TWF fighter has almost the identical feats as another player's TWF ranger/barbarian, except he's got swords and I have axes, it's kind of irritating. :) |
| DragonsArt02-17-05, 10:25 AM | So how skewed do the results of THF vs TWF become if you take a Rogue 3/Fighter 12/Tempest 5 with the Over-sized TWF feat? At Level 4 Tempest, there are effectively no penalties to attack rolls with two Bastard swords.... Or, if you wanted to get funky... Rogue 3/Fighter 7/Invisible Blade 5/Tempest 5 Feints before each attack, giving +5d6 sneak, no penalties for two-weapon fighting with daggers. Base weapon damage goes down but the ability to feint and then launch sneak attacks should still make damage greater. Then, add poison and the CV weapon capsules (+1d6 to each weapon) to the mix and TWF is defiantely the clear winner. |
| frisbeet02-17-05, 12:59 PM | Or, if you wanted to get funky... Rogue 3/Fighter 7/Invisible Blade 5/Tempest 5 Feints before each attack, giving +5d6 sneak, no penalties for two-weapon fighting with daggers. Base weapon damage goes down but the ability to feint and then launch sneak attacks should still make damage greater. Then, add poison and the CV weapon capsules (+1d6 to each weapon) to the mix and TWF is defiantely the clear winner. Nope, not the clear winner. I was just posting on the same topic in the optimization board and I'd thought I'd inject similar analysis here. Razoreface's analysis is the correct way to go. I've got a spreadsheet on my site (signature), free to download and mess with, which does this analysis. Takes into account criticals. Parameterize your character and weapons. Optimize power attack. That sort of thing. Unhide all of the Excel worksheets to see the guts of the calculations. They’re all correct. I’ve just completed an update to allow for PrC sneak attack, as it’s a necessity in this build calculation. Anyway… THF Dude: Barbarian2/Fighter16/ExoticWeaponMaster2 Str 32 (16 ability + 5 level + 5 tome + 6 belt) Dex 16 Bastard Sword specific feats/stunts: Weapon Focus; Greater Weapon Focus; Weapon Specialization; Greater Weapon Specialization; Improved Critical; Uncanny Blow Other relevant feats: Extra Rage (rage 3x day); Power Attack He full attack rages for this comparison. Wields +10 bastard sword (200,000 gp): +5 speed flaming shock bastard sword. TWF Dude2: Rogue 3/Fighter 7/Invisible Blade 5/Tempest 5 Str 29 (16 + 2 level + 5 tome + 6 belt) Dex 19 (16 + 3 level) Dagger specific feats: Weapon Focus; Weapon Specialization; Improved Critical Other relevant feats/abilities: Uncanny Feint = Sneak Attack All the Time; Tempest Ambidexterity equates to a TWF penalty of 0 when wielding daggers; TWF; iTWF; gTWF Wields two +8 daggers (256,000 gp together): Dagger1: +3 speed flaming shock dagger Dagger2: +5 flaming shocking-burst dagger So, why these weapon enchantments? Calculating vs. AC precludes the Brilliant Energy, because then you'd just look at ACs 10-20. Ghost Touch, Defending, Wounding, etc. are nice accessories which don't effect the normal damage/round calculation--though you're probably better off with some of them. What's left: enchantment bonus, extra damage, and speed. So each Dude gets a speed weapon. Money-wise, I figure TWF should invest more than THF in his weapons, since he's already invested his feats in it. But I didn't want to double the amount to 400,000 gp. Therefore, two +8s for TWF, & one +10 for THF. That's clearly a judgment call, and another reason why one comparison shouldn't decide the issue. Turns out you're better off with a +1 flaming weapon than +2 weapon, even with power attack. So I tried to max extra D for all 3 weapons. Flaming, shock, and frost are the only extras available in DMG. Can't put frost with flame, as many DMs have a tough time with this. Dot dot dot. That's how I ended up with the weapons for this comparison. By spreadsheet I’ve calculated the maximum average full attack damage/round against ACs 10-50. This maximum is found by brutally calculating each average for all possible power attack values. I’d be happy to show my work, but having done this enough times over the last 2 years I can say with absolute certainty that the following numbers are exact (having rounded to 0.1). AC TWF AC best PA THF difference 10 329.6 10 20 476.6 147.0 11 329.6 11 20 471.4 141.8 12 329.6 12 20 466.2 136.6 13 329.6 13 20 455.8 126.3 14 329.6 14 20 445.5 115.9 15 329.6 15 19 435.2 105.6 16 329.6 16 19 425.0 95.5 17 329.6 17 18 415.0 85.4 18 329.6 18 18 405.1 75.5 19 329.6 19 17 395.2 65.7 20 327.3 20 17 385.6 58.3 21 325.1 21 16 376.0 50.9 22 322.9 22 15 366.4 43.5 23 320.7 23 14 356.8 36.1 24 318.5 24 13 347.2 28.7 25 314.1 25 12 337.6 23.6 26 309.6 26 11 328.0 18.4 27 303.1 27 10 318.4 15.3 28 296.6 28 9 308.8 12.2 29 290.1 29 8 299.2 9.1 30 281.3 30 7 289.6 8.3 31 272.6 31 6 280.0 7.4 32 261.8 32 5 270.4 8.6 33 250.9 33 4 260.8 9.9 34 240.1 34 3 251.2 11.1 35 224.7 35 3 241.8 17.0 36 209.4 36 2 232.5 23.1 37 192.1 37 2 223.5 31.3 38 177.0 38 1 214.6 37.6 39 161.9 39 1 205.9 44.0 40 146.6 40 0 197.4 50.8 41 131.5 41 0 189.0 57.6 42 116.2 42 0 180.7 64.5 43 103.3 43 0 166.5 63.2 44 90.4 44 0 152.5 62.1 45 79.4 45 0 138.7 59.3 46 68.6 46 0 127.6 59.0 47 57.6 47 0 116.5 58.8 48 49.0 48 0 105.0 56.0 49 40.4 49 0 93.8 53.4 50 33.7 50 0 82.8 49.1 Scroll right to see the difference column. |
| Aracor02-17-05, 02:18 PM | Nah, the TWF can get ahead. He just needs to cheat. Sneak attack damage is a nice bonus, but where you can really shine is if you pick yourself up a couple daggers of wounding. In 3.5, that's 1 con damage per hit. Ouch. Every two hits they're losing 1 hp per hit die. That'll add up QUICK, and in fact my level 27 rogue can actually manage to do about as much damage with the con damage as he does with the HP damage for 14d6 sneak attack per hit. Want it to be sicker? He's also got debilitating strike. 2 str damage per hit on top of it. Monsters don't like fighting that guy. I also notice that you're counting optimal power for your spreadsheet. That's assuming that you know the exact AC of the creature you're fighting, which most of the time in my games we don't. And you're not counting that a TWF can use power attack if they use a bigger weapon than a dagger, which can also help make up the deficit, especially at the very low ACs. ~Aracor |
| DragonsArt02-17-05, 02:23 PM | Nope, not the clear winner. I was just posting on the same topic in the optimization board and I'd thought I'd inject similar analysis here. Razoreface's analysis is the correct way to go. Hmmm.... I didn't see that you took into account that the target would not have dexterity due to the feinting. Combined with Brilliant Energy, this would be a potent combination. |
| DragonsArt02-17-05, 03:28 PM | Nah, the TWF can get ahead. He just needs to cheat. Sneak attack damage is a nice bonus, but where you can really shine is if you pick yourself up a couple daggers of wounding. In 3.5, that's 1 con damage per hit. Ouch. Every two hits they're losing 1 hp per hit die. That'll add up QUICK, and in fact my level 27 rogue can actually manage to do about as much damage with the con damage as he does with the HP damage for 14d6 sneak attack per hit. Want it to be sicker? He's also got debilitating strike. 2 str damage per hit on top of it. Monsters don't like fighting that guy. Excellent point. Combine the daggers of wounding with poison and you've got a very nasty combination since higher level creatures will suffer HUGE hit point loss each time they take 2 points of CON. For instance, a 15HD monster will suffer 15 more hps for each 2 points of CON lost. That would make a HUGE difference. Plus, with oversize 2WF feat, you could use dual bastard swords, long swords, etc. |
| tarkin02-17-05, 03:50 PM | I agree with the recent posters. TWF works FAR better than THW if you use "per attack bonuses". The typical Per attack bonuses are: Sneak Attack Ranger Favored Enemey bonus Poison weapon enchantments, such as Flaming, Wounding As the person is playing a Ranger/Rogue, he should DEFINITELY go for Two Weapon Fighting Note, posion and flaming/wounding must be applied to both weapons, so it is an expensive route to go. But it still is a far better idea than Sundering your treasure. Also as others have noted, TWF has advantages when it comes to: DR (two chances to beat their DR), disarming, and sundering. |
| frisbeet02-17-05, 05:36 PM | Hmmm.... I didn't see that you took into account that the target would not have dexterity due to the feinting. Combined with Brilliant Energy, this would be a potent combination. Clearly I needn't take into account dexterity, as that is rolled into AC. Just look at the lower ACs. Edit: So for example, if the AC bonus denied by feinting is +4, then compare Dude1 AC 30 to Dude2 AC 26. That should make you feel better, as Dude2 TWF Invisible Blade does better fullattacking in the AC 30-40ish range. Of course, as Aracor points out, you can't know your opponent's exact AC--but that's what makes combat fun. If I were a TWF, I absolutely would go the Con damage route. Now, somebody brought up DR. Lessee who comes out then. I'll abandon the Invisible blade cause you're going to need PA. In that case, how about: THF Dude1: same as above. TWF Dude2: Fighter5/Dervish10/Tempest5 Str 29 (16 + 2 level + 5 tome + 6 belt) Dex 19 (16 + 3 level) 11 Feats needed: Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, & Improved Critical in Longsword. Plus Dodge, Mobility, Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved Two-Weapon Fighter, Greater Two-Weapon Fighting, Combat Expertise, Power Attack & Oversized TWF. Dervish Lvl3 grants spring attack, thus qualifying the Dude for Tempest levels. Other relevant abilities: Dervish Dance grants +5 attack & damage bonus; Tempest Ambidexterity + Oversized TWF equates to a TWF penalty of 0 when wielding two longswords. Dervish dances for this comparison. Wields two +8 longswords (256,000 gp together): Longsword1: +3 speed flaming shock longsword Longsword2: +5 flaming shocking-burst longsword Opponent: DR 20. I don't know what a realistic DR should be. Probably 10. AC best PA TWF best PA THF difference 10 20 281.0 20 384.6 103.6 11 20 277.1 20 380.4 103.3 12 20 273.2 20 376.2 103.0 13 20 267.4 20 367.8 100.4 14 20 261.6 20 359.5 97.8 15 20 255.9 20 351.1 95.2 16 20 248.2 20 342.8 94.6 17 20 240.5 20 334.4 93.9 18 19 232.9 19 324.8 91.9 19 18 225.3 18 315.2 89.9 20 17 217.8 17 305.6 87.8 21 16 210.2 16 296.0 85.8 22 15 202.7 15 286.4 83.7 23 14 195.1 14 276.8 81.7 24 13 187.5 13 267.2 79.7 25 13 180.1 12 257.6 77.5 26 12 172.8 11 248.0 75.2 27 12 165.7 11 238.7 73.0 28 11 158.7 10 229.5 70.7 29 11 151.9 10 220.5 68.7 30 10 145.2 9 211.6 66.4 31 9 138.6 9 203.1 64.5 32 8 131.9 8 194.5 62.7 33 7 125.2 8 186.3 61.1 34 6 118.6 7 178.2 59.6 35 5 111.9 7 170.3 58.4 36 4 105.3 6 162.5 57.3 37 3 98.6 5 154.7 56.1 38 2 92.2 4 146.9 54.7 39 2 86.0 3 139.1 53.1 40 1 80.3 2 131.3 51.0 41 0 74.7 1 123.5 48.8 42 0 69.5 0 115.7 46.2 43 0 63.8 0 106.5 42.7 44 0 58.7 0 97.5 38.8 45 0 53.7 0 88.7 35.0 46 0 48.5 0 81.6 33.1 47 0 43.4 0 74.5 31.1 48 0 38.2 0 67.0 28.8 49 0 33.9 0 59.8 25.9 50 0 29.7 0 52.8 23.1 Scroll right to see the difference. Ok, I'm starting to see a pattern here. TWF works FAR better than THW if you use "per attack bonuses". certainly isn't true if the only bonuses you apply are sneak attack and/or extra damage. Again, helps to know opponent AC. After 1 round you will, of course. That said, TWF has its place, and it's not with extra damage. Vorpal, Wounding, these are the the abilities which shine for TWF. The hit point battle in most comparisons goes to THF, though TWF comes close. If Dude1 isn't raging and there's no DR, TWF beats him. |
| Razoreface02-17-05, 09:21 PM | Nope, not the clear winner. I was just posting on the same topic in the optimization board and I'd thought I'd inject similar analysis here. Razoreface's analysis is the correct way to go. Actually not mine, it's what I was ah.. briskly.. corrected with, about two years back, in a similar thread when I messed up and had the TWF damage far higher than I should have. I wish I could remember who it was that did it, but it was long enough ago that the relatively simple group of formulas he laid out expanded into a big mess of if and else statements for things like hit chance caps at 95% and 5%. So how skewed do the results of THF vs TWF become if you take a Rogue 3/Fighter 12/Tempest 5 with the Over-sized TWF feat? About as skewed as when the THW guy uses his multitude of spare feats to get proficiency in a heavy weapon and monkey grip. You can munch out both styles as much as you want and make the one you want look great, but someone else can munch out just as much on their side, and they come off still pretty equal. Feints before each attack, giving +5d6 sneak, no penalties for two-weapon fighting with daggers. Base weapon damage goes down but the ability to feint and then launch sneak attacks should still make damage greater. Actually no.. since SA's were included in every attack in the math I was using before. Smart fighters have someone flanking all the time. Then, add poison and the CV weapon capsules (+1d6 to each weapon) to the mix and TWF is defiantely the clear winner. Barely tops, since you add the same on THW, you're effectively only gaining 3d6 with the TWF over the THW. TWF works FAR better than THW if you use "per attack bonuses". Not exactly far. THW gets five attacks per round, TWF only gets three extra offhand attacks. Very specific builds can get nine, I think maybe ten in one quite specific case. But most people only have eight, so it's not a very big difference. There's also an optimal Rogue/Fighter level too, I forget what it is, but it's with a higher than +2d6 SA anyway. You can see it on the sheet I have pretty easily. Note, posion and flaming/wounding must be applied to both weapons, so it is an expensive route to go. But it still is a far better idea than Sundering your treasure. Money is the big balancer, it's why that last part of my overly long post is very important. And who the hell sunders treasure? The big sway on TWF is actually the number of extremely powerful prestige classes that are designed for it. The very little that THW gets manages to keep up with it, but barely. If there were actually a THW class that compared to the Dervish or Tempest, there'd be a pretty big open ground again. |
| frisbeet02-17-05, 09:42 PM | A note about Dervish: You. Do. Not. Have. To. Two. Weapon. Fight. Nowhere is this a requirement. The synergy of combat feats available in lieu of the TWF feat tree can enable a Dervish more than TWF. Stuff like Elusive Target, Combat Reflexes, Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Power Attack, Cleave--well shoot, I'm listing them all--these all can come in handy during a Dervish dance. |
| Razoreface02-17-05, 10:27 PM | Yeah, but it's not really that good without the TWF bonuses, and using half a prestige class just generally seems unappealing. There's got to be a better choice. |
| Ze_Mighty_Vegetable02-18-05, 01:53 AM | A player's luck can also influence the choice, you know. I'm incredibly unlucky on dice rolls, so I like taking 2wf at low-levels simply to gain another chance to hit. :D Am I alone in this? |
| Razoreface02-18-05, 05:01 AM | I find it's mostly a matter of perception. For a long time I played in a group where the majority of nine players believed that if you were fighting and didn't have a shield, you were basically retarded if you weren't TWFing. From their view, more attacks was always the better option. It wasn't for a very long time until one player had a THW cleric completely maul a devil that the three TWF guys were barely touching, good-aligned DR and elemental resistances mean guess what, those three +1d6's mean nothing. The TWF guys in that group are hyper min-maxers, and complained (complained! that the cleric killed someone) that he was stacking too many things, and got lucky dice rolls. (which consisted of attack rolls of 8, 15, 9, and something that missed, and nearly minimum on his damage rolls) Of course, I've TWF'd throwing axes with rapid shot at level one. |
| Zed02-18-05, 07:56 AM | I have seen many arguments over which one to take. But if he uses the rangers combat style, he can have high strength, low dex and still use two weapons. But it requires light armor. |