Oversized Two Weapon Fighting


Homebrew and House Rules

Shadow Lodge

So why hasnt a feat like this been added to the game, it has been used many times in adventuring novels. (Drizzt is the most known example.)

OVERSIZED TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING
You are adept at wielding larger than normal weapons in your off hand.

Prerequisite: Str 13, Two-Weapon Fighting.

Benefit: When wielding a one-handed weapon in your off hand, you
take penalties for fighting with two weapons as if you were wielding a light weapon in your off hand.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

That's a 3.5 feat. Not Pathfinder.

There is no Drizzt in Pathfinder.

Use Sawtooth Sabres.

You get the same effect.


The incapability to make iconic charates from fantasy is a weakness of the system.

NOte however there is an option for that class of character

Improved Balance (Ex)

At 11th level, the attack penalties for fighting with two weapons are reduced by –1 for a two-weapon warrior. Alternatively, he may use a one-handed weapon in his off-hand, treating it as if it were a light weapon with the normal light weapon penalties

Perfect Balance (Ex)

At 15th level, the penalties for fighting with two weapons are reduced by an additional –1 for a two-weapon warrior. This benefit stacks with improved balance. If he is using a one-handed weapon in his off hand, treating it as a light weapon, he uses the normal light weapon penalties.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/fighter/archetypes/paizo---fig hter-archetypes/two-weapon-warrior

sadly those abilities comes to late in the game.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Reflavored Sawtooth Sabres.

Problem solved.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Reflavored Sawtooth Sabres.

Problem solved.

Yoe would sti.l need to use the same kind weapon in both hands. I prefer the feat.


EWP: Two bladed sword
EWP: Double Bladed Axe

It's effectively the same thing.

Grand Lodge

So, you want to two weapon fight, with two different weapons?

That's not Drizzt.

Besides, Sawtooth Sabres are one-handed weapons, but count as light weapons for the purposes of determining two weapon fighting penalties.


How do we know Drizzt doesn't just accept the extra -2 penalties?

Grand Lodge

Other than complaining about a 3.5 feat not being in Pathfinder, what do you want?

What are you trying to get answered?

Grand Lodge

Where is the Rules Question?

Are you looking to convert that feat?

Are you looking to build a Drizzt PC in Pathfinder?

What do you want?


blackbloodtroll wrote:

So, you want to two weapon fight, with two different weapons?

That's not Drizzt.

Besides, Sawtooth Sabres are one-handed weapons, but count as light weapons for the purposes of determining two weapon fighting penalties.

sawtooth sabres need EWP,so you still need to spend a feat. if you need a feat to twf with the two sawtooth sabres why not a feat to twf with any two one-handed weapons?

The optionto negate the penalty with two one-handed weapons should be in the game. it is not, but is an easy houserule. besides it is far form overpowered.


Nicos wrote:
sawtooth sabres need EWP,so you still need to spend a feat. if you need a feat to twf with the two sawtooth sabres why not a feat to twf with any two one-handed weapons?

You could easily say the same about many of the exotic weapons. Why bother with a bastard sword; why not just spend a feat to let you wield two-handed weapons in one hand without penalty?


AvalonXQ wrote:
Nicos wrote:
sawtooth sabres need EWP,so you still need to spend a feat. if you need a feat to twf with the two sawtooth sabres why not a feat to twf with any two one-handed weapons?
You could easily say the same about many of the exotic weapons. Why bother with a bastard sword; why not just spend a feat to let you wield two-handed weapons in one hand without penalty?

Bastard sword is inferior to other two handed weapons. are you agianst a feat like Overzised TWF? why?


Nicos:

Even assuming Paizo likes that feat not all feats can be imported into Pathfinder. Intellectual Property laws and all that. We do not know which feats the Paizo staff have looked at and then decided they could not replicate it in PF without stepping on WoTC's considerably powerful toes.

If you want the feat, houserule it. Otherwise...use Sawtooth Sabres.

- Gauss


Nicos wrote:
are you agianst a feat like Overzised TWF? why?

I like the archetype you linked (two-weapon warrior); the feat, however, grants you both bonuses in one and you can get it a lot earlier (like what, level 2 as a fighter?). Why take the archetype, which sets the precedent for over-sized two-weapon fighting for Pathfinder at that point?

Before long, after someone allows oversized two-weapon fighting, the next question will be, "why is there no monkey grip in Pathfinder?"

Then we'll see the same old thing from 3.5: dual-wielded greatsword / polearm / scythe (s) of doom!

Or whatever. I don't remember the mechanics folks used to use for that crap, I removed the related feats long before I ever switched to Pathfinder. I'm delighted they no longer exist.


Gauss wrote:

Nicos:

Even assuming Paizo likes that feat not all feats can be imported into Pathfinder. Intellectual Property laws and all that. We do not know which feats the Paizo staff have looked at and then decided they could not replicate it in PF without stepping on WoTC's considerably powerful toes.

If you want the feat, houserule it. Otherwise...use Sawtooth Sabres.

- Gauss

this is the suggestion/Houserule forum and i Know it would be far for paizo to import the feat, this is why i said a couple of post ago that it was an easy houserule.


Da'ath wrote:
Nicos wrote:
are you agianst a feat like Overzised TWF? why?

I like the archetype you linked (two-weapon warrior); the feat, however, grants you both bonuses in one and you can get it a lot earlier (like what, level 2 as a fighter?). Why take the archetype, which sets the precedent for over-sized two-weapon fighting for Pathfinder at that point?

Before long, after someone allows oversized two-weapon fighting, the next question will be, "why is there no monkey grip in Pathfinder?"

Then we'll see the same old thing from 3.5: dual-wielded greatsword / polearm / scythe (s) of doom!

Or whatever. I don't remember the mechanics folks used to use for that crap, I removed the related feats long before I ever switched to Pathfinder. I'm delighted they no longer exist.

1)The ability from the archetypes is awful. At that level the character already should have taken WF, GWF, WS, Improved critical in his choosen weapons. So, the character stay half his carer with a -4 to hit or he never use the ability because he spend his feats in light weapons at the lower levels.

2) there was a attmept to make an archetype with basically monkey grip. The titan mauler. sadly it fails at several levels.


And by "Fails" you mean "Doesn't render all other melee attacks obsolete."

Here's what you can already do in Pathfinder.

1) Spend feat on Aldori Duelling Sword.
2) Get a Large Aldori Duelling Sword. It attacks as a One-Handed Martial Weapon with a base damage of 2d6. You're attacking at -2 to hit, but take Weapon Focus and make it Masterwork and that goes away.
3) Get Plate Armor and a Tower Shield.

Now you're effectively fighting with a 2d6 base damage weapon with an AC of 24 with no magical enhancements...


AdAstraGames wrote:

And by "Fails" you mean "Doesn't render all other melee attacks obsolete."

Here's what you can already do in Pathfinder.

1) Spend feat on Aldori Duelling Sword.
2) Get a Large Aldori Duelling Sword. It attacks as a One-Handed Martial Weapon with a base damage of 2d6. You're attacking at -2 to hit, but take Weapon Focus and make it Masterwork and that goes away.
3) Get Plate Armor and a Tower Shield.

Now you're effectively fighting with a 2d6 base damage weapon with an AC of 24 with no magical enhancements...

it fails because it was bad written and the archetype do not do what the designer intended for it.

Now, how it is using a biger weapon obsolete other melee attack? certainly barbarian have way more powerful abilities. A "come and get me" barbarian could do more damge with a dagger.

A feat like overzided TWF woudlbe much less powerful than improved critical.


I don't mean to derail the thread, but I have something I've been wondering. Are the Drizz't books really bad, and he is portrayed as the ultimate Mary Sue, or are people just tired of the way the fandom latched on to him and wanted to make their own, kinda like Blade at a Vampire game?

I never read the books.


The first three books were great, granted I read them years ago (around 20) as they were released and my tastes have changed, so take that with a grain of salt.

The number of Drizzt clones that have been mass produced since that time is almost equal to the number of "Mary Sue/Gary Stu" accusations since the time of Paula Smith.

In essence, any Drow PC that is good is a Drizzt clone according to some, and any character that an author primarily writes about regularly is a Mary or Gary.

Using your Blade reference, anyone who plays a dhampir could be accused of the same, despite the fact that dhampir have been around for a long time thanks to Balkan folklore (checked Wikipedia, and while not a reliable source, it's good enough for these boards).

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Oversized Two Weapon Fighting All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Homebrew and House Rules