Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Johnny_Angel 06-05-07, 05:41 AM	I know that Ambidexterity is not in the 3.5 version of the game, but I still use some 3.0 books (Book of Vile Darkness, MM2, etc.) How does Ambidexterity translate from 3.0 to 3.5? Ambidexterity = Perfect Two Weapon Fighting? Ambidexterity = not taking offhand penalties? Ambidexterity = ???? Maybe a more specific example will help answer my question. There is a PrC in the Book of Vile Darkness called The Warrior of Darkness. At some WoD levels you get to choose special powers that your devotion to evil has rewarded you with. One of the powers you can choose grants you the Ambidexterity feat. What could I give to someone using this PrC to replace Ambidexterity?
Radijs 06-05-07, 05:48 AM	Removing twf penalties could work, Neater would be to replace it with a feat like improved twf or greater twf.
Kouk 06-05-07, 06:41 AM	I don't think it is necessary to replace it at all, given the size of that list of bonus feats available. I would say put Two Weapon Defense or Greater TWF or Manyshot or Rapid Reload on the list, maybe all of them. The majority of combat feats from the PHB appear to be in there already.
Axiomatic_vampire 06-05-07, 06:49 AM	what about giving back full str. bonus to damage on the formerly "off" hand.
Frugal 06-05-07, 08:00 AM	First, I'd start with the 3.5 update booklets for the creature in question and see if that says anything. If they don't have TWF I'd give them that, if they do I'd give them a different feat since ambidexterity was rolled into TWF in 3.5.
kainpendragon 06-05-07, 08:58 AM	yes it was rolled in to TWF in 3.5 but. but the Str bonus on your off hand sounds like it would be good thing. or you can think of over size TWF = ambidex in current rules. The word "ambidextrous" is derived from the Latin roots ambi, meaning "both," and dexter, meaning "right" (as opposed to left) or favorable. Thus, "ambidextrous" is literally "right on both sides". meaning that Str bouses would be the same with both hands and weapon size would not matter. people are born this way there for the feat would have to be taken at 1st level. people who try to train them selves to be ambidex are never as good at it as those that are born that way. hench why there is penetlies for TWF
Frugal 06-05-07, 09:31 AM	Yes, I'm well aware of the meaning of ambidextrous in real life (being sinister myself), I was merely saying that in game terms, the feat was rolled in. Personally, I'd be much more in favour of giving them a different feat (preferably something TWF related) than come up with a new effect for ambidextrous, especially since that's now the name of a class feature in 3.5 (for the Tempest PrC).
Johnny_Angel 06-05-07, 10:46 AM	Yes, I'm well aware of the meaning of ambidextrous in real life (being sinister myself), I was merely saying that in game terms, the feat was rolled in. Personally, I'd be much more in favour of giving them a different feat (preferably something TWF related) than come up with a new effect for ambidextrous, especially since that's now the name of a class feature in 3.5 (for the Tempest PrC). What does the Tempest feature do?
tarkin 06-05-07, 11:00 AM	1. Ambidexterity does exist in 3.5. It is given to you free as part of TWF. I.E. what you got in 3.0 for two feats is now given to you in one. REJOICE at the free feat you are given. Celebrate it. Don't get all whiny and beg for more stuff. 2. TWF fighting rules already are pretty maxed out. Mathematically it is a FAR better combat technique than Two handed weapon, particularly if you play smart and do per attack bonuses such as Sneak Attack, Tripping, Disarming, etc. etc. 3. The game designers have already discussed and dismissed both enhanced strength and decreasing the penalty from -2 as beyond the ability of a mere feat. Please note that most stats you only get x1. With either THW or TWF you get x1.5 total. The extra x0.5 for your off hand is itself a GIFT. TWF is not a sequential set of attacks, it is simultaneous. Your strength is being used for your attacks, and you do NOT have more to spare. Most of your strength for arm attacks comes from your back and if you are using it for one set of attacks it can not also be added to the other. ------ Existing Prestige Classes/Epic feats already things like reduce the penalty below -2 and increase your strength. There is no logical reason to move these Epic/Prestige Class abilities to normal feats.
Johnny_Angel 06-05-07, 11:08 AM	1. Ambidexterity does exist in 3.5. It is given to you free as part of TWF. I.E. what you got in 3.0 for two feats is now given to you in one. REJOICE at the free feat you are given. Celebrate it. Don't get all whiny and beg for more stuff. 2. TWF fighting rules already are pretty maxed out. Mathematically it is a FAR better combat technique than Two handed weapon, particularly if you play smart and do per attack bonuses such as Sneak Attack, Tripping, Disarming, etc. etc. 3. The game designers have already discussed and dismissed both enhanced strength and decreasing the penalty from -2 as beyond the ability of a mere feat. Please note that most stats you only get x1. With either THW or TWF you get x1.5 total. The extra x0.5 for your off hand is itself a GIFT. TWF is not a sequential set of attacks, it is simultaneous. Your strength is being used for your attacks, and you do NOT have more to spare. Most of your strength for arm attacks comes from your back and if you are using it for one set of attacks it can not also be added to the other. ------ Existing Prestige Classes/Epic feats already things like reduce the penalty below -2 and increase your strength. There is no logical reason to move these Epic/Prestige Class abilities to normal feats. On one hand I seem to understand what your comments have to do with my question; on the other hand I feel slightly lost. I'm not trying to get extra stuff or anything; I'm trying to figure out how to replace Ambidexterity with something else whenever it is a feature of a 3.0 class or PrC. Maybe this question would illustrate what I'm asking better: If I had a character made with 3.0 rules, and one of the feats on my character sheet was Ambidexterity, what would I change Ambidexterity to in order to play that same character in a 3.5 game?
Steely_Dan 06-05-07, 11:13 AM	2. TWF fighting rules already are pretty maxed out. Mathematically it is a FAR better combat technique than Two handed weapon I think it has been pretty well established that two-handed fighting is far more powerful than two-weapon fighting.
Steely_Dan 06-05-07, 11:18 AM	If I had a character made with 3.0 rules, and one of the feats on my character sheet was Ambidexterity, what would I change Ambidexterity to in order to play that same character in a 3.5 game? Two-Weapon Fighting
Johnny_Angel 06-05-07, 11:22 AM	I don't think it is necessary to replace it at all, given the size of that list of bonus feats available. I would say put Two Weapon Defense or Greater TWF or Manyshot or Rapid Reload on the list, maybe all of them. The majority of combat feats from the PHB appear to be in there already. You made some good points here; what you said is what I was thinking about doing. I was just curious if Ambidexterity matched up with anything in 3.5 rules. Yes, I'm well aware of the meaning of ambidextrous in real life (being sinister myself), I was merely saying that in game terms, the feat was rolled in. Personally, I'd be much more in favour of giving them a different feat (preferably something TWF related) than come up with a new effect for ambidextrous, especially since that's now the name of a class feature in 3.5 (for the Tempest PrC). I'm curious about what the Tempest ability does. I think it has been pretty well established that two-handed fighting is far more powerful than two-weapon fighting. debatable, but not in this thread I'm not trying to be rude, but I don't want this to turn into a flame war between TWF supports and THF supporters.
Steely_Dan 06-05-07, 11:27 AM	1.) I'm curious about what the Tempest ability does. 2.) I'm not trying to be rude, but I don't want this to turn into a flame war between TWF supports and THF supporters. 1.) It lowers the penalties for TWF even further. 2.) I support both; so don't worry about it.
Frugal 06-05-07, 11:32 AM	What does the Tempest feature do? Removed the penalties for TWF, it was spread over 2 levels in a 5 level PrC, first the penalty's reduced by 1 (-3/-3 or -1/-1 with a light weapon) then completely eliminated (-2/-2 or no penalty with a light weapon). I'm not trying to get extra stuff or anything; I'm trying to figure out how to replace Ambidexterity with something else whenever it is a feature of a 3.0 class or PrC. Ambidexterity wasn't a class feature, it was a feat. If a class or PrC granted it then it was likely as a bonus feat. Maybe this question would illustrate what I'm asking better: If I had a character made with 3.0 rules, and one of the feats on my character sheet was Ambidexterity, what would I change Ambidexterity to in order to play that same character in a 3.5 game? TWF if they don't already have TWF. If they do have TWF then they've freed up a feat. If the feat was granted as a bonus feat from a class then check for a 3.5 update to the class and/or select a new bonus feat. If it was one of your normal feats then just select a new feat, for thematic purposes I'd go with another TWF feat.
Frugal 06-05-07, 11:40 AM	I should add that if you're doing an update from 3.0 to 3.5 I think the best way to handle it is to do a from the ground up rebuild rather than a translation. A lot of classes changed, as well as skills so you're better off taking the same classes as before (or possibly minor variations with DM approval if the theme fits) but build him up as if he was a new character. I think you'll find it far easier than trying to sort things out like how innuendo being rolled into bluff affects your skill points, or if you took ride with various mounts and now it doesn't need specialisation. The goal is to create the closest match to the old character so keep the classes, skills and feats as close as you can get but I think that focusing on the "theme" or concept of the class and then going for what exists in 3.5 that covers those same themes or concepts is easier and a better way to go than trying to directly translate things.
Johnny_Angel 06-05-07, 11:46 AM	I'm actually not doing an update to a character. I was just trying to ask my question in a way that would get the type of response I was looking for. You gave really good advice though. I appreciate the responses. I use 3.5, but I do have a few 3.0 books. Most of the stuff is easy to update, but I was at a loss for what to do with ambidexterity. It doesn't come up very often, but I thought it was something that would be good for me to know.
starfire311 06-05-07, 11:49 AM	1. Ambidexterity does exist in 3.5. It is given to you free as part of TWF. I.E. what you got in 3.0 for two feats is now given to you in one. REJOICE at the free feat you are given. Celebrate it. Don't get all whiny and beg for more stuff. 2. TWF fighting rules already are pretty maxed out. Mathematically it is a FAR better combat technique than Two handed weapon, particularly if you play smart and do per attack bonuses such as Sneak Attack, Tripping, Disarming, etc. etc. 3. The game designers have already discussed and dismissed both enhanced strength and decreasing the penalty from -2 as beyond the ability of a mere feat. Please note that most stats you only get x1. With either THW or TWF you get x1.5 total. The extra x0.5 for your off hand is itself a GIFT. TWF is not a sequential set of attacks, it is simultaneous. Your strength is being used for your attacks, and you do NOT have more to spare. Most of your strength for arm attacks comes from your back and if you are using it for one set of attacks it can not also be added to the other. ------ Existing Prestige Classes/Epic feats already things like reduce the penalty below -2 and increase your strength. There is no logical reason to move these Epic/Prestige Class abilities to normal feats. Agreed to a certain extent, I feel there is a need to move some class abilties to feats, and elimante some of the PrCs, but that is a general statement on game design and is not entirely relevant to this thread. If you are not changing anything else, then I feel that persone with ambidexteterity should just replace it with TWF, if they already have TWF then they get what ever they want, that they qualify for. I think it has been pretty well established that two-handed fighting is far more powerful than two-weapon fighting. I think both you and Tarkin are making a mistake by using the word "far" here. I dont feel that either is much better than the other in general and that both are "far" better than the other in specific situations. TWF is far better than THF for rogues. THF is far better than TWF for frenzied berserkers. BTW, I could argue the other side in both of these instances, they were just example archetypes.
risner 06-05-07, 07:07 PM	Ambidexterity is not in the 3.5 version of the game, but I still use some 3.0 books (Book of Vile Darkness, MM2, etc.) Amidexterity = Two Weapon Fighting (It was rolled into TWF feat) So, if you do anything other than ignore the feat or use TWF in it's place, you are doing something wrong. If I had a character made with 3.0 rules, and one of the feats on my character sheet was Ambidexterity, what would I change Ambidexterity to in order to play that same character in a 3.5 game? Your ONLY option is to use Two Weapon Fighting as the replacement for Amidexterity. If a pre-req has both Amidexterity and Two Weapon Fighting listed, then it can be satisfied with one feat, 3.5 Two Weapon Fighting.
SALDAR 06-05-07, 07:19 PM	I use 3.5, but I do have a few 3.0 books. Most of the stuff is easy to update, but I was at a loss for what to do with ambidexterity. It doesn't come up very often, but I thought it was something that would be good for me to know. Since ambidexterity was revised out of the game our group simply revised it out as well. We still use some 3.0 books and if a Prc or feat requires ambidexterity as a prerequisite we simply drop it from those prerequisites. We didn't try to replace it with another feat because the only reason any of our characters had it was as a prerequisite for TWF and any Prcs we had that required ambidexterity also required TWF. If one of our characters had it as a feat when we converted from 3.0 to 3.5 then that character got to choose a feat to fill the slot that was no longer filled by ambidexterity.
Aryxbez 06-05-07, 07:31 PM	In my games, I have revived the feat, however unsure if it is balanced. Amnidexterity Feat: Prequisites; Dex 18, Two-weapon Fighting,Oversized Two-weapon Fighting, Benefit:When wielding two weapons, the Penalties are reduced by 2, with having -2 with one handed weapon or no penalties with a light weapon in the off-hand. Also the off-hand deals normal strength damage.
Frugal 06-05-07, 10:34 PM	In my games, I have revived the feat, however unsure if it is balanced. Amnidexterity Feat: Prequisites; Dex 18, Two-weapon Fighting,Oversized Two-weapon Fighting, Benefit:When wielding two weapons, the Penalties are reduced by 2, with having -2 with one handed weapon or no penalties with a light weapon in the off-hand. Also the off-hand deals normal strength damage. You've made a class feature that's staged over 2 levels in the Tempest PrC into a single feat, that's probably not balanced.
Kouk 06-05-07, 10:59 PM	So we are all on the same page, Warrior of Darkness PrC from BoVD has a class feature that lets him choose a bonus feat or ability from a fairly lengthy list. Ambidexterity is one of the possible bonus feats, but so is just about any Fighter bonus feat that existed in the 3.0 PHB. Every feat available as a bonus feat is actually a Fighter Bonus Feat in 3.5, with the exception of Ambidexterity which no longer exists. It is probably the intention to just allow any Fighter Bonus Feat with that class feature of the Warrior of Darkness.
Aryxbez 06-05-07, 11:18 PM	You've made a class feature that's staged over 2 levels in the Tempest PrC into a single feat, that's probably not balanced. Not this again, People tell me this all the time, and it usually gets nowhere, I will try to remember next time to make sure this is not mentioned. Anyway, something that replaces a class feature sounds like a good idea to me. As all TWF types should not have to be dual wielding spring attackers. So, with the Tempest being disregarded, what do you think of it's balance? Otherwise putting the feat back into 3.5 pretty much makes your off-hand deal full strength, also a prequisite for Two-weapon fighting.
Ranger REG 06-06-07, 02:28 AM	Maybe a more specific example will help answer my question. There is a PrC in the Book of Vile Darkness called The Warrior of Darkness. At some WoD levels you get to choose special powers that your devotion to evil has rewarded you with. One of the powers you can choose grants you the Ambidexterity feat. What could I give to someone using this PrC to replace Ambidexterity? The equivalent of Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting feat.
Steely_Dan 06-06-07, 02:59 AM	In my games, I have revived the feat, however unsure if it is balanced. Amnidexterity Feat: Prequisites; Dex 18, Two-weapon Fighting, Oversized Two-weapon Fighting Benefit:When wielding two weapons, the Penalties are reduced by 2, with having -2 with one handed weapon or no penalties with a light weapon in the off-hand. Also the off-hand deals normal strength damage. Cool feat, but I think the 1 x Str bonus on the off-hand might be a bit too much. I bolded the 18 because ability score prerequisites for feats are always an odd number, so you should probably change it to Dex 19.
Frugal 06-06-07, 07:58 AM	Not this again, People tell me this all the time, and it usually gets nowhere, I will try to remember next time to make sure this is not mentioned. Anyway, something that replaces a class feature sounds like a good idea to me. As all TWF types should not have to be dual wielding spring attackers. So, with the Tempest being disregarded, what do you think of it's balance? Otherwise putting the feat back into 3.5 pretty much makes your off-hand deal full strength, also a prequisite for Two-weapon fighting. Well if we're talking balance, class features are generally considered more powerful than feats, they aren't always but it's a good rule of thumb. The class feature you're replacing is also spread over 2 levels so I'd say it's a pretty safe bet that making it into a single feat is unbalanced. Even if it's not, then adding in the full STR bonus definitely puts it over the top. You can complain all you want about bringing up a class feature but the fact is that the first thing that you should do when balancing a feat is compare it against similar mechanics; well look at this, there's a class feature that does exactly what part of of your feat does, I'd say it's perfectly valid to then say, "hey, that's an existing class feature, and it's spread over 2 levels of that class, I think that means your feat's not balanced." Now you can come back and say that the class is weak, or that the feat's not unbalanced but you can't just say, "pay no attention to the man behind the screen," and pretend the class feature doesn't exist. Now if we do pretend the Tempest class doesn't even exist and are balancing it purely on its own merits: Removes the final -2 penalty for TWF; gee, that on it's own sounds like a pretty good feat, maybe even too good. Allows you full STR damage off-hand; wow, that sounds like a really good feat, but probably too powerful on its own. Remove the penalty and full STR off-hand?! Damn, that's a ridiculously good feat, why wouldn't I take it?
starfire311 06-06-07, 08:36 AM	Well if we're talking balance, class features are generally considered more powerful than feats, they aren't always but it's a good rule of thumb. The class feature you're replacing is also spread over 2 levels so I'd say it's a pretty safe bet that making it into a single feat is unbalanced. Even if it's not, then adding in the full STR bonus definitely puts it over the top. You can complain all you want about bringing up a class feature but the fact is that the first thing that you should do when balancing a feat is compare it against similar mechanics; well look at this, there's a class feature that does exactly what part of of your feat does, I'd say it's perfectly valid to then say, "hey, that's an existing class feature, and it's spread over 2 levels of that class, I think that means your feat's not balanced." Now you can come back and say that the class is weak, or that the feat's not unbalanced but you can't just say, "pay no attention to the man behind the screen," and pretend the class feature doesn't exist. Now if we do pretend the Tempest class doesn't even exist and are balancing it purely on its own merits: Removes the final -2 penalty for TWF; gee, that on it's own sounds like a pretty good feat, maybe even too good. Allows you full STR damage off-hand; wow, that sounds like a really good feat, but probably too powerful on its own. Remove the penalty and full STR off-hand?! Damn, that's a ridiculously good feat, why wouldn't I take it? the aspect I guess would be it requires wield oversized weapon, so to fight with no penalty with 2 weapons and get full strength to off-hadn ti would cost a twf 2 feats, but if you were going oversized weapon route anyway, this feat is amazing.
Frugal 06-06-07, 08:49 AM	the aspect I guess would be it requires wield oversized weapon, so to fight with no penalty with 2 weapons and get full strength to off-hadn ti would cost a twf 2 feats, but if you were going oversized weapon route anyway, this feat is amazing. Well, if you're not going to fight oversized it's still really good, but with oversized TWF as a prereq you really have to ask why you wouldn't fight with oversized? And then, as you say, it becomes ridiculously good. I mean come on, dwarf with a pair of dwarven waraxes wielded at no penalty and dealing full STR for each one? Nasty!
risner 06-06-07, 09:39 AM	Not this again, People tell me this all the time, and it usually gets nowhere, I will try to remember next time to make sure this is not mentioned. Don't complain when you grant an insanely good feat (far beyond the power and scope of feats) and someone calls you out on the fact.
Aryxbez 06-06-07, 07:22 PM	Don't complain when you grant an insanely good feat (far beyond the power and scope of feats) and someone calls you out on the fact. Really that every time it is brought up, it never seemed to get anywhere discussion wise with the Tempest Class and this feat. It is Fine if someone tells me that something is wrong and the reason, just that I usually always hear this, and like I said, to be good at Two-weapon fighting, you shouldn't have to be grouped into a spring attacking prestige class, although it is a decent one. Also that I don't own the Complete Adventurer so I don't use it as a PC nor as a DM. Now if we do pretend the Tempest class doesn't even exist and are balancing it purely on its own merits: 1. Removes the final -2 penalty for TWF; gee, that on it's own sounds like a pretty good feat, maybe even too good. 2. Allows you full STR damage off-hand; wow, that sounds like a really good feat, but probably too powerful on its own. 3. Remove the penalty and full STR off-hand?! Damn, that's a ridiculously good feat, why wouldn't I take it? Glad to see the feat is going to be judged on it's self. Well this feat may be good, but it will require 18 dex, which is obvious that this part is not hard. Also that the 2-handed style is always been superior to the Two-weapon style, So I don't see why not to make a feat that makes it more powerful. After all Powerattack is a pretty powerful feat with the 2-handed style, and will most likely deal more damage than the 2-weapon style. Besides, if this doesn't prove my point any bit, you yourself could always suggest something to make it balanced. Really I think I should probably make the feat have some more prerequisites, just not sure what though.
DungeonMogrii 06-06-07, 08:43 PM	Besides, if this doesn't prove my point any bit, you yourself could always suggest something to make it balanced. Really I think I should probably make the feat have some more prerequisites, just not sure what though. Suggestions? Ok. Most here agree that by itself its too powerful, so the logical way to go is to make it into two feats: one for the penalty removal and one for the full strenght. The first one lets call Ambidexterity as you did, leave the DEX 19 and TWF requisites but let us add something more, may be a +9 BAB. The second one lets call Power Two Weapon Fighting and give it as requisites the oversized two weapon fighting feat, the normal TWF and a STR 17...and some BAB, lets say +9 (both +9's ar totally arbitrary on my part). Now you have two feats that do what you want and are not that powerfull themselves (at least not as much as the original). Anyways, two weapon fighting style is not about dealing damage with all your attacks (unless you have extra damage dice for sneak attack or the like) but for having combat options. Improved Trip and Improved disarm are the way to go for a two weapon fighter. That or high level Tiger Claw maneuvers from the ToB, which are wicked cool.
AAB 06-06-07, 08:49 PM	Well, if you're not going to fight oversized it's still really good, but with oversized TWF as a prereq you really have to ask why you wouldn't fight with oversized? And then, as you say, it becomes ridiculously good. I mean come on, dwarf with a pair of dwarven waraxes wielded at no penalty and dealing full STR for each one? Nasty! i prefer waraxe and maul and go with the Anvil of Thunder weapon style feat.
risner 06-06-07, 11:53 PM	Really that every time it is brought up, it never seemed to get anywhere discussion wise with the Tempest Class and this feat. It is Fine if someone tells me that something is wrong and the reason, just that I usually always hear this, and like I said, to be good at Two-weapon fighting, you shouldn't have to be grouped into a spring attacking prestige class, although it is a decent one. Also that I don't own the Complete Adventurer so I don't use it as a PC nor as a DM. Fine. Feat: Weapon Focus is +1 to attack on a single weapon and is worth 9.09% increase in damage in a single attack or in two weapon mode each hit is only 9.09% less damage. (Standard 57.8% base chance to hit a proper CR mob.) In short with WF you have 63% chance to hit single and 105.88% chance to hit on two attacks. Your Feat: is a +2 to attack on any weapon and is worth much more. It is worth 18.18% on a single hit and is even for two weapon hits. So 68.25% single and 115.50% two weapon is the base hit chances. There are only two feat in game that are better: Weapon Specialization and Melee/Ranged Weapon Mastery at 36.36% and 62.28% respectively. In short it is at least double the power of weapon focus even if it were limited to one weapon. Because it is not limited to one weapon, that makes it more than double the power of weapon focus. Possibly a fair value is triple? So your feat without the STR from 1/2 to full is worth three times one of the better melee feats (Weapon Focus.) The +2 attack part of your ability is a 4th level class ability. Your feat is equal to a 4th level Tempest ability. Feats are by design supposed to be below desirable class abilities. Your feat should not be that good. Things are balanced by what they do for the BEST class for the feat. You must examine what your feat does for a PC that is designed to use your feat (or built around the use of your feat) and if it is too good (like it is) then you need to not allow this feat. I highly doubt I am the first to show you raw math to prove your feat is broken. I suspect many others have done so and you brush it aside. Your free to my math off and continue to say no one has shown you how it is broken, as I suspect you will.
DarkRhystar 06-07-07, 12:04 AM	Fine. Feat: Weapon Focus is +1 to attack on a single weapon and is worth 9.09% increase in damage in a single attack or in two weapon mode each hit is only 9.09% less damage. (Standard 57.8% base chance to hit a proper CR mob.) In short with WF you have 63% chance to hit single and 105.88% chance to hit on two attacks. Your Feat: is a +2 to attack on any weapon and is worth much more. It is worth 18.18% on a single hit and is even for two weapon hits. So 68.25% single and 115.50% two weapon is the base hit chances. There are only two feat in game that are better: Weapon Specialization and Melee/Ranged Weapon Mastery at 36.36% and 62.28% respectively. In short it is at least double the power of weapon focus even if it were limited to one weapon. Because it is not limited to one weapon, that makes it more than double the power of weapon focus. Possibly a fair value is triple? So your feat without the STR from 1/2 to full is worth three times one of the better melee feats (Weapon Focus.) The +2 attack part of your ability is a 4th level class ability. Your feat is equal to a 4th level Tempest ability. Feats are by design supposed to be below desirable class abilities. Your feat should not be that good. Things are balanced by what they do for the BEST class for the feat. You must examine what your feat does for a PC that is designed to use your feat (or built around the use of your feat) and if it is too good (like it is) then you need to not allow this feat. I highly doubt I am the first to show you raw math to prove your feat is broken. I suspect many others have done so and you brush it aside. Your free to my math off and continue to say no one has shown you how it is broken, as I suspect you will. Numbers and percentages without reference to how they are arrived at are meaningless. You could have quite easily pulled them right out of your butt for as much as it matters and considering that such percentages are often a function of AB to AC ratio, it's quite possible that's exactly what you did. In answer to the OP: Grant a generic Fighter bonus feat and let the player choose what to spend it on.
Aryxbez 06-07-07, 01:12 AM	I highly doubt I am the first to show you raw math to prove your feat is broken. I suspect many others have done so and you brush it aside. Your free to my math off and continue to say no one has shown you how it is broken, as I suspect you will. Suspect what you will, but If I am shown wrong, that is fine, I am not perfect, I am not always right and all that. If the mistake is truly horrible, I will change it as so and it will be the end to that problem. Also no one I recall has shown me why it was broken in any form of mathematical proof. Until now of course,So Whether or not you believe what I say is up to you. Anyway, I was thinking of changing the feat prerequisite to be Improved Two-weapon fighting instead of Oversized TWF, and having the penalty lessened by -1 instead of the normal -2. Adding these I think will probably help balancing it. Since the Penalty is no fully negated unless you take that tempest prestige class, or weapon focus, also that now the feat can only be grabbed by those with a decent BAB.
Johnny_Angel 06-07-07, 01:53 AM	Wow, this thread has grown far beyond what I ever intended. To get back on the topic of what I was trying to figure out I've come to the conclusion that the best thing to do is to just choose something else from the list of abilities. I went through some of my old stuff and found my old 3.0 PHB. One thing I noticed that is a big difference between 3.0 and this feat and 3.5 without this feat is that 3.5 doesn't seem to focus as much on the idea of an "off-hand." As far as I can tell, in 3.5, it doesn't matter if your character is left or right handed; you can use a weapon just as well in either hand without any of the TWF feats as long as you're only using one weapon at a time. In 3.0 you took a -4 penalty for using your off-hand even if you were only using one weapon. If you were right handed and put the weapon in your left hand you took a -4 penalty. Also, Ambidexterity was not a prerequisite for two-weapon fighting, but it was a prerequisite for improved two-weapon fighting. If I really had to create Ambidexterity in 3.5, I imagine that it would be a feat that reduced the "off-hand" penalty for TWF. The problem here is that the feat would become useless once you gained access to Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting, so for it to be a viable feat you'd have to figure out how to make sure the feat still has a purpose at higher levels and isn't consumed by other feats. Therefore, IMO, instead of having Ambidexterity reduce the penalty for TWF, Ambidexterity in 3.5 should just give you a +1 to attack rolls when two-weapon fighting. That way once you gain PTWF you still get some sort of benefit from the feat. It would look something like this: Ambidexterity [general] Prerequisites: Dex 15 or higher, Two-Weapon Fighting, Base Attack Bonus +9 or higher Benefit: While two weapon fighting you recieve an unnamed +1 Bonus to attack rolls. Special: A fighter may select Ambidexterity as one of their fighter bonus feats. Whether or not that is balanced I couldn't honestly say, but it doesn't seem to be too bad.
Steely_Dan 06-07-07, 03:40 AM	but it will require 18 dex Feats never have an even numbered ability score as a prerequisite; I would change it to Dex 19.
pmurray@bigpond.com 06-07-07, 03:45 AM	How does Ambidexterity translate from 3.0 to 3.5? ... One of the powers you can choose grants you the Ambidexterity feat. What could I give to someone using this PrC to replace Ambidexterity? 3.5 TWF subsumes 3.0 Ambidexterity+TWF. I wish they'd replace Hide + Move Silent with "Stealth", and Spot + Listen with "Awareness".
risner 06-07-07, 10:09 AM	Numbers and percentages without reference to how they are arrived at are meaningless. Weapon Focus: =(MAX(MIN((VALUE(E10)+$G$2+1-A10)/20+$Y$2;0.95);0.05)+IF((VALUE(E10)-5)>0;MAX(MIN((VALUE(E10)+$G$2+1-5-A10)/20+$Y$2;0.95);0.05);0)+IF((VALUE(E10)-10)>0;MAX(MIN((VALUE(E10)+$G$2+1-10-A10)/20+$Y$2;0.95);0.05);0)+IF((VALUE(E10)-15)>0;MAX(MIN((VALUE(E10)+$G$2+1-15-A10)/20+$Y$2;0.95);0.05);0))/(MAX(MIN((VALUE(E10)+$G$2-A10)/20+$Y$2;0.95);0.05)+IF((VALUE(E10)-5)>0;MAX(MIN((VALUE(E10)+$G$2-5-A10)/20+$Y$2;0.95);0.05);0)+IF((VALUE(E10)-10)>0;MAX(MIN((VALUE(E10)+$G$2-10-A10)/20+$Y$2;0.95);0.05);0)+IF((VALUE(E10)-15)>0;MAX(MIN((VALUE(E10)+$G$2-15-A10)/20+$Y$2;0.95);0.05);0))-1 E10 = BAB (e.g. +1) $G$2 = 1x STR Mod (e.g. +3 for STR 16) A10 = Character Level $Y$2 = =(21-$Y$1)/20 $Y$1 = 13 which is MM suggested AC Adjust for fair monsters (Target CR + 13) I also have the code for Roundabout Kick, Flurry, Power Critical, Weapon Spec/Heavy Handed, Improved Critical, Power Attack (based on normal AC for CR only), Melee Weapon Mastery and more. Here is the base hit chance: =(MAX(MIN((VALUE(G10)-A10)/20+$Y$2;0.95);0.05))*(1+(21-L10)*(M10-1)/20) + IF((VALUE(E10)-5)>0;(MAX(MIN((VALUE(G10)-5-A10)/20+$Y$2;0.95);0.05))*(1+(21-L10)*(M10-1)/20);0) + IF((VALUE(E10)-10)>0;(MAX(MIN((VALUE(G10)-10-A10)/20+$Y$2;0.95);0.05))*(1+(21-L10)*(M10-1)/20);0) + IF((VALUE(E10)-15)>0;(MAX(MIN((VALUE(G10)-15-A10)/20+$Y$2;0.95);0.05))*(1+(21-L10)*(M10-1)/20);0) L10 = Crit on value (for example 20 on a 20 X2 weapon) M10 = Crit multiplier (for example 2 on a 20 X2 weapon) G10 = total + to hit (for example +4 for a +1 BAB with 16 STR) You take the base hit chance multiplied by the damage average per hit and factor in the Weapon Focus increase as a percent increase (9.09% = multiply by 1.0909) and you do get an accurate picture of the average damage per round. Satisfied the values are backed up by real math? Want the spreadsheet I have to do more testing or for your own uses? PM me for it if you wish. Ambidexterity [general] Prerequisites: Dex 15 or higher, Two-Weapon Fighting, Base Attack Bonus +9 or higher Benefit: While two weapon fighting you recieve an unnamed +1 Bonus to attack rolls. Special: A fighter may select Ambidexterity as one of their fighter bonus feats. This feat is still in the top 5 feats (mechanically) in the game. That +1 bonus is to all strikes and as such is valued more than +1 Weapon Focus (since it works for all your weapons) because you must assume it will be used by TWF players maximizing their output (one handed weapon in primary and light in off-hand) instead of using the same weapon in both hands (like would be required for WF to benefit them.) Being better than Weapon Focus isn't exactly a crime, it is just that there are very few feats in the game that are better than Weapon Focus. It is a very short list.
pmurray@bigpond.com 06-08-07, 12:01 AM	This feat is still in the top 5 feats (mechanically) in the game. That +1 bonus is to all strikes and as such is valued more than +1 Weapon Focus (since it works for all your weapons) because you must assume it will be used by TWF players maximizing their output (one handed weapon in primary and light in off-hand) instead of using the same weapon in both hands (like would be required for WF to benefit them.) I like the Tiger Claw Master PRC from ToB. Two levels (Two!) will give you Superior TWF - no penalty when using light weapons. Effectively, +2, and other goodies. That, and one level of Dervish, lets you fight with two scimitars with no penalty.
risner 06-08-07, 01:37 AM	I like the Tiger Claw Master PRC from ToB. Two levels (Two!) Tiger Claw Master? Not from Tome of Battle or Tome & Blood?
starfire311 06-08-07, 10:37 AM	Tiger Claw Master? Not from Tome of Battle or Tome & Blood? think he meant bladeclaw master from ToB. it gives superior twf with daggers and tigerclaw weapons. this is at 2nd level it removes the penalty for fighting with 2 daggers or tiger claw weapons and also gives you a stance that lets you add full strength ot off-hand attacks with daggers or tiger claw weapons... so it gives 2 class abilties, one of them that uses up a resource(stance) and both only work with a limited number of weapons to duplicate what the feat in question does.
risner 06-08-07, 01:13 PM	think he meant bladeclaw master from ToB. it gives superior twf with daggers and tigerclaw weapons. this is at 2nd level it removes the penalty for fighting with 2 daggers or tiger claw weapons and also gives you a stance that lets you add full strength ot off-hand attacks with daggers or tiger claw weapons... so it gives 2 class abilties, one of them that uses up a resource(stance) and both only work with a limited number of weapons to duplicate what the feat in question does. thanks for the info/page/ref. So in short, 3 levels are needed (2 in Bladeclaw Master and 1 in some other base class to gain the 3 maneuvers pre-req) to gain a feat that is this Ambidexterity but limited to two weapons (Dagger or Tigerclaw.) 3 levels restricted low end weapons with STR bonus vs 4 levels (Tempest) vs 4 levels unrestricted but no STR bonus Seems about equal to me. So this feat is worth 3 or 4 class levels. one level of Dervish, lets you fight with two scimitars with no penalty. Are Scimitars considered Daggers or Tigerclaw Weapons? If not, how do you stack Dervish on this?
AAB 06-08-07, 01:33 PM	well tiger claw weapons are a subset of weapons that include kukri, kama, claw, handaxe, greataxe, and unarmed strike. so not so limited as you think, but still not useable with dervish scimitars.
pmurray@bigpond.com 06-09-07, 03:17 AM	Are Scimitars considered Daggers or Tigerclaw Weapons? If not, how do you stack Dervish on this? My bad. Now tha I am at home, and not posting from work :D I have the book with me. The class is "Bloodclaw Master", Tome of Battle p96. I am considering this class for my current campaign, to get Superior TWF and Tiger Claw Synergy. Synergy is good for me, as I use Hunters' Stance and Blood in the water stance. The other class abilities are not so interesting. Shifting 1/day - bleh. +2 to strength, once a day, for 2 rounds (my character), and claws. However ... the shifting ability (probably) qualifies you for the Warshaper Prc, if you want to go that way. Morphic healing is not to be sneezd at, neither is Morphic Body if you are a strenth based fighter. Claws of the beast - double bleh. My character is dex based, and gains no benefit from this at all. The only cost is that it slows down my progression in Warblade class features. Meh. It does not slow down my initiator level progression at all (which tempest does do). If I take it at level 9, I must take a tiger claw maneuver, which I was going to do anyway (Dancing Mongoose). I get to know a new stance at level 12 instead of level 10, so I have to wait, but I like the ones I have now.