Two-Weapon Warrior archetype could accomplish what you're looking for. Eventually you'll be able to wield two Longswords without penalty, you'll have you flat Weapon Training bonuses when you perform TWF (though I would suggest you pick up Scimitars instead, as the critical multipliers are infinitely more valuable than the measly damage dice increase).
TWF requires very high Dexterity to acquire the relevant feats, and requires good Strength to capitalize on your offense. Unfortunately, a Fighter can't be that MAD, or he'll get screwed over.
Being a Fighter, you won't need the Bonus Feat. The Skill Point/Level is nice, but outside of Perception and maybe Acrobatics, you won't really need Skill Points, making the Dual Talent Racial Trait for Humans really nice to have (+2 to two different ability scores). If it is a problem, the Background Skills alternate rules from Unchained can be implemented (as they should; everybody likes free Skill Points).
Presuming 20 Point Buy:
Strength 18 (16 + 2)
Dexterity 17 (15 + 2)
Constitution 14
Intelligence 10
Wisdom 12
Charisma 7
You'll be able to run around with Medium Armor (presumably Mithril Agile Breastplate) and have enough Dexterity to get all of the relevant TWF feats, plus the Strength to deal some good damage.
Here's a basic Feat Progression tree:
1. Two-Weapon Fighting, Double Slice
2. Combat Reflexes
3. Iron Will
4. Improved Initiative
5. Weapon Focus (Scimitar)
6. Improved Two-Weapon Fighting
7. Hammer the Gap
8. Improved Critical (Scimitar)
9. Weapon Specialization (Scimitar)
10. Greater Weapon Focus (Scimitar)
11. Two-Weapon Rend
12. Greater Two-Weapon Fighting
13. Penetrating Strike
14. Greater Weapon Specialization (Scimitar)
15. Critical Focus
16. Greater Penetrating Strike
17. Tiring Critical
18. Sickening Critical
19. Critical Mastery
20. Improved Iron Will?
Start with a Kukri and a Scimitar. When you can reduce TWF penalties, switch to dual Scimitars.
TWF requires a lot of to-hit, on-hit effects, and feats (or ways to bypass pre-requisites/shelter feats) to make truly viable. In addition, with the release of the Master Handbooks, whether this is really a worthwhile build (since you sacrifice Armor Training, Weapon Training, etc., which you should be building off of,) is questionable.
There's remarkably little support for dual wielding a longsword and a shortsword, or any other similar weapon configuration. To make matters worse, the Fighter is probably one of the worst classes to pursue that Fighting style, since all its offensive class features revolve around specializing in one weapon type to the exclusion of all others.
If Valeros is going to stay a Fighter, then ditching the longsword and using two short swords is definitely the way to go. There's just no nice way to make a Fighter good at dual wielding weapons from two different weapon training groups. At that point, just assign as many feats into improving your shortswords as you can. If you can get dex to damage that'd be great, but currently 3 levels of Unchained Rogue is the only way to do that with Paizo-only material. This is probably worthwhile, even if it does feel little off for the Fighter iconic. Another source to look at is the weapon master's handbook, which has some superb options for fighters (particularly one feat that makes Bravery apply to all will saves, effectively giving you a good rather than poor will save progression).
Presuming 20 Point Buy:
The iconics always use the following array: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8
Yes, their stats are that cringeworthy.
I see no reason you can't have two scimitars and skin them as longsword and short sword .
Well, you did specify "preferably longsword and shortsword". If you're okay with reskinning them, then the exact weapons are rather irrelevant. Mechanically, what you want is the same weapon type in each hand.
Do note that the two weapon fighter is incompatible with the new advanced weapon training options from the Weapon Master's Handbook since it replaces Weapon Training.
That is a cool build. I don't know if it feels like Valeros though.
You can use Longswords or Shortswords if you want. I'm just pointing out that if you want them to be strong, while loosely fitting the flavor, you may have to sacrifice some of the original feel. Scimitars are long swords too; they're just curved.
The iconics were made specifically to be functional, flavorful, and not optimal characters. If you want them to be optimal, you'll need them specialized, and when flavor gets in the way of optimization, you'll have to change it, especially if you want them to be strong.
That being said, Dasrak made me realize that taking One-handed Weapons specifically is kind of pointless, since you won't be Two-handing for 1.5x Strength, or acquiring 1.5x Strength to your damage at any point in time, the only benefit of using One-handed Weapons. I will revoke my statement about the Scimitar and instead make it the Kukri, so as to reduce your TWF penalties to a minimum.
This is relevant, as the Advanced Weapon Training features are pretty powerful; the ability to apply Bravery to all Will Saves, having improved damage dice as a Warpriest, and some other good stuff, are practically required, and you aren't losing anything, as the TWF penalties are off-set by your Weapon Training bonuses (combined with Gloves of Dueling, of course).
Also, I'm not sure if the GM is required to use those stat arrays, especially if he wants to make them more optimized. It makes sense that they're more like PCs, especially if the iconics are going to be played as PCs, by players.
I mean, it can still work; 17 Strength, 16 Dexterity, 13 Constitution, 10 Intelligence, 12 Wisdom, 8 Charisma. It's not nice and neat as per the 20 Point Buy, but it's servicable as you level up.
|
Step 1. Be a Slayer instead.
Step 2. Crib the Ranger Combat Style Two-Weapon Fighting Feats without having to worry about prerequisites.
Step 3. Bask in glory as you have a second good save, study target to offset TWF penalties, all while having more skill points for when you're not trudging through sewers, caves and Old Cult temples.
How many of the Iconics are you planning to do this for?
(Also, it just occurred to me that Two-Weapon Fighter could use an update, such as having a version of Weapon Training that worked with 2 different weapons without needing forever to get online.)
Good points, especially the part about not being limited to Core, since by definition the Iconics for classes from later books are not limited to Core.
It then ultimately depends on how much you are willing for flavor to get in the way of optimization. I've already expanded upon the most optimal way for a TWF to engage. Hell, even that's not optimal because there are better ways to accomplish TWF than with a Fighter, much less one that's Strength-focused.
At least I determined that Two-Weapon Warrior archetype is practically worthless compared to the base class, and since Valeros is a standard Fighter, well...
I've already said why Kukris and Scimitars are better than Shortswords and Longswords; the critical multiplier is really important, since having more attacks means more opportunities to apply on-hit effects and rolling critical threats/confirmations to having more attacks. If you don't think the increased critical multipliers is worth sacrificing the flavor, then so be it. But you'll have to be spending feats for two sets of weapons when it's better to simply use the same weapon for each, as it saves you upwards of 4 feats.
Also consider that for Advanced Weapon Training; having to wait an extra 4 levels or so for Advanced Weapon Training to get Bravery bonuses to all Will Saves, extra Skill Points, and having improved damage dice, really bites. And one of those 3 benefits you can't have, if you need to use two different weapons, which I've demonstrated that you don't, nor should you.
I'd suggest you cite what things you do not want to change from the Iconic if you want me to help further. At this point, we're at a difference of opinion as to what constitutes the Iconic's flavor, and since it's not my game, it's your decision to determine what Valeros should/should not have.
I took a quick glance at his level 12 counterpart, specifically the tactics and character description. His primary preference is to get into position to TWF to benefit from Two-Weapon Shield (which is a crappy feat, by the way; it makes more sense to benefit from Two-Weapon Rend, per example). If he can't TWF, he attempts to use Vital Strike while two-handing a Longsword (which is equally inoptimal and impossible to do without sacrificing TWF, something which he much prefers over Vital Strike or two-handing).
So, to be frank, not only does having two different weapons sound irrelevant to his character's concept and tactics, but also serves no flavorful value, because the concept of a longsword + shortsword loadout has no significant value, flavorwise, to the character. He could use two different weapons and he would play practically identical than if he still used a longsword + shortsword loadout. He would play significantly stronger (and yet still practically the same) if he used two identical Light weapons (preferably the Kukris), because his tactics would not change, his build would only change to accomodate his change of weapons (i.e. Weapon Focii, Weapon Training, etc.), and everything else about him remains the same, both description and tactics.
He uses it in all the art and fiction.I took a quick glance at his level 12 counterpart, specifically the tactics and character description. His primary preference is to get into position to TWF to benefit from Two-Weapon Shield (which is a crappy feat, by the way; it makes more sense to benefit from Two-Weapon Rend, per example). If he can't TWF, he attempts to use Vital Strike while two-handing a Longsword (which is equally inoptimal and impossible to do without sacrificing TWF, something which he much prefers over Vital Strike or two-handing).
So, to be frank, not only does having two different weapons sound irrelevant to his character's concept and tactics, but also serves no flavorful value, because the concept of a longsword + shortsword loadout has no significant value, flavorwise, to the character. He could use two different weapons and he would play practically identical than if he still used a longsword + shortsword loadout. He would play significantly stronger (and yet still practically the same) if he used two identical Light weapons (preferably the Kukris), because his tactics would not change, his build would only change to accomodate his change of weapons (i.e. Weapon Focii, Weapon Training, etc.), and everything else about him remains the same, both descripion and tactics.
His description says that he's a skilled two-bladed warrior. Using two Kukris still fulfills that description.
Again, if you're really that stubborn on sticking with a longsword and shortsword, then be my guest, but the character is going to be extremely lackluster because of it.
I gave my opinion, you don't like it (even though you don't have one yourself), so how about you assert yours and use it, instead of asking for one that you clearly do not agree with. It's your game, so at this point I don't really care, as I gave my opinion and how I would do things.
If you're willing to reflavor him as a pirate, he can take the Corsair archetype and get a weapon group that includes a long and short weapon -- it's just that the longer one needs to be a cutlass instead of a longsword. Unfortunately, this is not compatible with Two-Weapon Warrior.
Are you cool with using 3rd party stuff?
I think BobTheCoward you are perhaps misleading about not having a preconceived notion of what you are looking for. Namely You are mandating by your opinions that he remains a long sword/ short sword user. Which plainly doesn't work very well. Do two short swords but keep it the same...that way you can just pick up weapon focus and specialization along with the same weapon training..that would suddenly make you a better Valeros. Getting the feats to stack like that means you are suddenly hitting at +2 and +3 to damage on each hit
I was going to suggest starting with The Talented Fighter from Rogue Genius Games. It allows for far greater customization of the class, but uses mostly the stuff in the PRD. It adds a few things from the RGG line, but I would say that 90% is PRD.
I've actually played Valeros, exactly as per the stats in the NPC Codex at various levels. I am of the opinion that he can be perfectly effective and fun to play if you simply leave him alone. Is he perfectly optimized? No, but the iconics aren't intended to be.
If you want to play around with alternate feats, archetypes, or whatever, that's perfectly fine. I just wanted to let you know that you can go pretty far and have a fair amount of fun with what some people consider sub-optimal stats and feat selections.
Also, if you want to play the character using the 'method acting" approach to role-playing, you can get a fair amount of personality insight from the Pathfinder comics he's been featured in.
Well, let me take a crack at full build that balances power and style:
Valeros - 20 Point Buy
Sources: Core Rulebook, Advanced Players Guide, Weapon Master's Handbook, Inner Sea Primer, Path of War
Archetype: Qadiran Dervish
Str 10, Dex 19, Con 14, Int 12, Wis 12, Cha 8
Fighter 1 - Two Weapon Fighting, Weapon Finesse, Deadly Agility
Fighter 2 - Weapon Focus (Kukri)
Fighter 3 - Iron Will
Fighter 4 - Weapon Specialization (Kukri), +1 Dexterity
Fighter 5 - Weapon Training (Light Blades), Advanced Weapon Training (Focused Weapon)
Fighter 6 - Improved Two Weapon Fighting
Fighter 7 - Advanced Weapon Training (Armed Bravery), Blind Fight
Fighter 8 - Improved Critical (Kukri), +1 Dexterity
Fighter 9 - Greater Weapon Focus (Kukri)
Fighter 10 - Improved Blind Fight
Fighter 11 - Greater Two Weapon Fighting
Fighter 12 - Penetrating Strike, +1 Dexterity
Fighter 13 - Advanced Weapon Training (Versatile Training [Bluff, Diplomacy]), Critical Focus
Fighter 14 - Greater Weapon Specialization (Kukri)
Fighter 15 - Blinding Critical
Fighter 16 - Greater Penetrating Strike, +1 Dexterity
Fighter 17 - Advanced Weapon Training (Defensive Weapon Training), Stunning Critical
Fighter 18 - Critical Mastery
Fighter 19 - Advanced Weapon Training (Trained Initiative)
Fighter 20 - Improved Initiative, +1 Dexterity
Overall, I'm pretty happy with this. It's not perfect, as it ditches the longsword + shortsword fighting style, uses an archetype whose fluff doesn't work well, and pinches a necessary feat from a 3PP, but overall it gets a nice bit of power while being well-rounded and still holding the concept of a single-class Fighter iconic that uses two weapon fighting. This Valeros is effective in combat while still being flavorful and reasonably well-rounded (by the standards of a single-class Fighter, anyways).
At low levels, Valeros focuses exclusively on improving his damage and accuracy with kukris. He's fully functional from level 1 (where he'll use shortswords - only locking into Kukris at the 2nd level) with a damage profile of +3/+3 1d6+4/18-20. This improves rapidly so by level 5 he has a profile (presuming +1 kukris) of +11/+11 1d8+9/18-20. By level 20 (presuming Valeros is rocking a +4 inherent bonus to dexterity, is using +5 Kukris, and is hasted) the profile becomes +41/+41/+41/+41/+36/+36/+31/+31/+26 2d6+25/15-20. Critical hits can be particularly debilitating, threatening blindness and stunning; without immunity to these effects, most monsters are completely incapacitated after taking a full attack from Valeros... if they're still alive at all. Valeros can also sacrifice one of his attacks at his highest attack bonus to perform a full attack after a charge, giving him some much needed mobility at higher levels.
However, Valeros isn't just a damage-dealing machine; his defenses are quite well-rounded. Presuming +8 bracers of defense, +5 ring of protection, +5 amulet of natural armor, and +5 cloak of resistance, he has 44 AC (27 touch), +19 fortitude, +23 reflex, and +19 will. While none of these are spectacular for a 20th level character, they're all solid and allow Valeros to put his neck on the front line where it needs to be to dish out that melee damage.
Rounding him out, Valeros has a total of 4 skill points per level and starting from level 13 he adds Bluff and Diplomacy to his list of class skills and can substitute his base attack bonus in place of his ranks in those skills (in other words, two free maxed out skills!) making him surprisingly reasonable in social encounters and freeing up those highly limited skill points for placement elsewhere. While he's a combat character first and foremost, he's not completely useless when out of his primary element.
The thing about iconics is they are, well, iconic representations of Pathfinder character builds. Making Valeros a Qadiran Dervish dual wielding kukris makes him an optimized two-weapon fighter, and a perfectly legitimate build - but he's no longer Valeros.
To be honest, I don't understand why you would want to try to optimize Valeros rather than jsut starting from scratch and building a PC/NPC of your own. If you want to use him, just use him as is. Otherwise you're just building a different character. Maybe this is sort of a rigid way of looking at it, but for those of us who kind of like the 'character' of the iconics (myself included) this seems a bit disingenuous.
It does make for interesting theory-crafting though, so if I'm being a wet blanket, that's fair enough.
My first question is...what level are you playing him at?
My second question is, are you comfortable with a 3p weapon enhancement?
The reason I ask is because of the Sun Sword's special ability to be wielded as either a bastard sword or short sword.
It's the equivalent of a +1 ability.
If you allow Valeros to have a +1 long or bastard sword that he can wield as a short sword...then SO MANY PROBLEMS with his build just go away. His weapon training dovetails. He can spec in both weapons and get full benefits. Even if he wields it two handed, his short sword bonuses always apply!
Also, you should give him 3 levels of the Chevaliar Class (found here: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/prestige-classes/other-paizo/c-d/chevalier) , which is a rather overpowered PrC that yet fits him absolutely perfectly. Post-10th is fine, although it could come in very useful earlier. Good will save, charm resistance, poison immunity and 1/day smite...what's not to love?
Give him ONE level of ranger. TWF, of course. And, lets him use CLW wands, Gravity Blades, even Instant Enemy... FE Giants, humans or whatever...for flavor for the campaign, can be set as desired. Ranger skill points will pay for Item Mastery UMD ranks and Chevaliar skill ranks reqs.
You MIGHT want to give him a level of Urban (or normal) Barb. A few rounds of rage as a buff...and fast movement 40'. IF you're not going the heavy armor route, this is the way to go.
Don't go up the TWF tree. Get two weapon rend and stop there. Get Shield Focus (Buckler) and Unhindered Shield to up his AC. Don't be afraid to put away the off hand weapon and 2h the long/bastard sword.
His first Weapon Training feat at 5th (spend a general feat) should be Weapon Bond: Weapon Training t/day, add a +1 bonus/4 levels to your sword, OR a special power for equal cost.
That special power should be BANE against whatever foe.
At 9th level, give him ABUNDANT TACTICS ... add your Weapon Training bonus to how many times you can use Weapon Bond. THEN...buy Gloves of the duelist. So, at level 9 or 10, he should be able to use Weapon Bond 8 times a day, one minute each use. BANEBANEBANE away and kill stuff.
Advanced Armor Training: Armor Specialization in whatever type of armor he's going to use long term. The AC benefits are simply too good to pass up.
Item Mastery: Flight Mastery. His abundant tactics increase the usage/day...it will allow him to use Fly several times a day. Works with a Str/Dex belt.
Get Cut from the Air, takes out missiles. At higher levels, Spellcut is +BAB vs a spell for a save, which might be great for your poor reflex and/or will save.
You may just want to give him the Achievement Feat A History of Scars...+2 Nat AC, -2 Cha checks. He does have a massive scar, after all.
As an Andoran, the perfect Regional feat for him would be Big Game Hunter - +1/+2 against size L or bigger enemies.
Get Armor Material Mastery: can use to add +d6 flaming to a weapon attack for free, or other special effects (someone else will have to post, it isn't online yet)
For traits: I suggest Defender of the Society (whatever Armor you have Armor Spec in), and I'm sure someone will recommend something else.
Build his main weapon towards a Sun Sword. +1, treat as short sword, +2/+2 vs evil, +2, double dmg vs undead, shed light, in that order.
His primary weapon group will be Light Blades.
There is always Cayden Cailean's Blade and Tankard for a fighting style...two weapon fighting with a rapier and tankard... smacking people with Cayden's holy symbol... courage in a bottle could be very nice. Drunken brawler too..not to mention the trait fortified drinker... Be drunk the whole adventure!!
Sensate would let him use any weapon equally well, but no AWT and can't use the weapon training gloves. Still it's one of the best archetypes for a single class fighter, barring mutation warrior which doesn't fit Valeros well.
Would your build be different if it was an NPC Valeros rather than PC Valeros?
I kept him pretty balanced (for instance, not dumping charisma down to a 7) so surprisingly little. His dexterity drops to 17, his intelligence rises to 13 (irrelevant), and the biggest loss will be reduced wealth which will mean he won't be able to afford a good AC and will be a bit of a glass cannon at level 20.
The thing about iconics is they are, well, iconic representations of Pathfinder character builds. Making Valeros a Qadiran Dervish dual wielding kukris makes him an optimized two-weapon fighter, and a perfectly legitimate build - but he's no longer Valeros.
Valeros doesn't even work as he's currently built. He's so poorly built that he's better as a two-handed weapon fighter than he is a two-weapon fighter. I've put him through my spreadsheet before, and I'll do it again. Here's the level 12 Valeros Iconic build, calculating for his standard two-weapon fighting profile and two-handed longsword profile:
The hasted attack profile for two weapon fighting for Valeros is +20/+20/+15/+10 1d8+13/17-20 with the longsword and +17/+12 1d6+8/19-20 with the short sword. Against an AC 27 target (recommended guidelines for a CR 12 monster) this averages 54 damage per round. The hasted attack profile for two-handed fighting for Valeros is +22/+22/+17/+12 1d8+15/17-20 with the longsword. Against that same AC 27 target, his attack sequence comes out to an average of 57 damage per round. Without haste, the comparison is a bit closer with 34.5 vs 35. Four feats and 8000 GP could have been saved for other things, plus he could have gone for a str/con belt instead of a str/dex/con belt and saved massively there, and things are just going to get worse at higher levels as he's locked out of critical hit feats and the cost of maintaining so many physical stats and weapons continues to grow.
(edit; forgot to apply the +1 from haste in my original numbers - was wondering why my numbers seemed so low)
The problem is that Paizo has never released good feats or fighter archetypes to support this fighting style. Even with substantial optimization, you'll essentially be paying half a dozen feats just to get where you would have been if you were two-handing a longsword and had spent those feats on skill focus instead. What Valeros needs is a few really strong feats (or a really strong archetype) that gives him big numerical bonuses or lets him do things that other builds cannot with his fighting style. Paizo has had years to do that, but hasn't. Meanwhile, we get stuff like Focused Weapon advanced weapon training that let me upgrade the damage dice of my Kukris to be as big as those of a longsword, and automatically upgrade all the way up to a friggen greatsword! It's harder than ever to make Valeros competitive because the alternatives have gotten better and better with each product release, while longsword + shortsword gets nothing. I like flavor, I like strange and wonderful fighting styles, but it needs to actually function. And Valeros doesn't function.
I actually did play around extensively with trying to get Longsword + Shortsword to work before saying "screw it" and going with two kukris. My best approach was to use the Fighter's Finesse advanced weapon training to make the Longsword a finesse weapon, and then use the Weapon Specialist advanced weapon training to make the longsword and shortsword share feats. Unfortunately, there were a few big gaping holes. First, I couldn't find any way to make longsword and shortsword share the same weapon training group (and it'd probably be a feat equivalent even if it were) and I'd need to take the Weapon Specialist advanced training twice to cover all my feats. So I'm spending 4 feats - one of which has to be homebrewed - just to make this approach work... and it's still strictly inferior to dual kukris with a single feat to improve their damage dice.
Maybe this is sort of a rigid way of looking at it, but for those of us who kind of like the 'character' of the iconics (myself included) this seems a bit disingenuous.
I was building within the limits of published material, and there just isn't a way to make Valeros' concept work well. If a player came to me with a concept that revolved around a longsword and shortsword, because that was the visual image the player had in mind, I'd start to work homebrewing some support for it to make it work. However, this thread isn't about homebrew or houserules that can be used to help a Valeros build. It's about making a Valeros build within the rules of Pathfinder... and longsword + shortsword is just not workable.
The reason I ask is because of the Sun Sword's special ability to be wielded as either a bastard sword or short sword.
It's the equivalent of a +1 ability.
I can already see where you're going with this, and I love it :D
But I am very intrigued that newer rules allow a better and more Valeros type character than core rules Valeros.
I give Weapon Finesse and Power Attack for free, and allow feats to be chosen by weapon training group rather than individual weapon. I've also consolidated the weapon training groups somewhat so light and heavy blades are one group. Finally, I have a dexterity in addition to strength feat that applies to one-handed melee weapons. All of this is massively beneficial for a prospective longsword + shortsword Valeros build... although even with all that it's still inferior to double Kukris now that Focused Weapon advanced weapon training is a thing :-\
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's not a competitive game. If a player really wanted longsword and short sword, and simply split the weapon foci and specialty or only for one of their weapons, they would probably be perfectly happy.
I've been monitoring the posts here so far, but this post right here really irked me to respond, and here's why.
In your opening post, you have this sentence:
Despite this, I had an idea of having some super awesome rebuilt iconics starting with Valeros. They would remain flavorful, fit the original style, and also be really good at their fighting style.
The bolded parts are extremely prevalent, because from your OP, you stated that you wanted "super awesome rebuilt iconics," and for them to "remain flavorful, fit their original style, and also be really good."
Tell me, if it's not a "competitive game", then what's the purpose of asking for them to be rebuilt, to be super-awesome, or to be really good, when the concept of competition, either with players or with the environment the GM lays out? Obviously we're not saying it's a competitive game in that the players are going to be fighting each other, but if competition between players doesn't matter (such as saying "Hey, I can do more damage than you!"), then why even bother for asking for a rewrite, if apparently the iconics, their optimization flaws and all, are still "really good" and "super awesome" to play?
The funny part is, reflecting on your other posts in relation to that sentence you made in the OP, you actually contradict yourself and your original goal with all of the subsequent posts you make. So really, all you've done at this point is waste everyone's time with asking for optimization help, when you've practically rejected it because you feel that competition between players (practically the entire purpose of optimization, by the way) should not be warranted, and that sacrificing character strength and functionality for flavor (based on your posts saying that having major flaws in your character build is still just fine) is "unacceptable" to have at your table.
I really question what the real point of this thread is besides trolling the optimization community on these messageboards, because we've given solid advice as to how you could optimize iconics to be "super awesome, and also be really good," still remain very true to the character (not 100%, because then what's the point of rebuilding them when they'd still be the same exact character?), and have their standard flavor, and so far, all you've done is jerk us around like a bunch of dogs on a leash when you decide to yank our chain for answers that you choose to ignore or block behind some illusion of "flavor" boundaries that you are not stating (which I have requested for, multiple times, I might add).
As of right now, not only am I done giving advice for this thread, but I'm done posting in it too. There's nothing further to be done here by me, or anyone else seeking to help the OP, until he decides to help himself and fix his own problem, in his own way, because it's quite clear that our advice that we've given up to this point has been ignored or dismissed by some notion that is not being explained.
At any rate, all I can say is good luck.
It's not a competitive game. If a player really wanted longsword and short sword, and simply split the weapon foci and specialty or only for one of their weapons, they would probably be perfectly happy.
This is only true to an extent. While you won't be fighting against the other players, you will be fighting with them. The goal isn't to be as strong as possible, but to be strong enough to be competitive with the rest of the party. If everyone is playing with characters on par with longsword+shortsword fighters then that weakness will never be an issue because the baseline is so low. If everyone comes with powerful characters, the baseline will be much higher and something like the iconic Valeros build will be basically non-functional because of how bad it is at what should be its specialty.
Anyways, I'm still not entirely clear on what exactly you were after, but I'm glad you've found it ;-)
The iconic characters should all be core only. The purpose isn't to showcase all of Pathfinder. It's to show what you can do with an average character in the core set. The character works. There are probably better ways to build him. There are definitely worse. He is simply average.
All that being said, I think it's interesting to see other builds for similar concepts with other books.
I did a valeros rebuild for Runelords a long time ago...he ended up being mostly ranger, a little fighter, and chevalier. I did the "Sun Sword" thing build up, he made it himself with ranger magic and Create Arms and Armor, and primary FE was giants. At high levels, he was murder against undead and giants, and the 1/day smite from Chevalier meant he was brutal in boss encounters.
Given his fighting style, keeping him a fighter pure was largely impossible. You can do it if you do the longsword as shortsword shtick to dovetail weapon training. otherwise, you're just wasting feats trying to make it work.
The iconic characters should all be core only. The purpose isn't to showcase all of Pathfinder. It's to show what you can do with an average character in the core set. {. . .}
Too late. We already have Iconics for all of the classes beyond Core, with the recent Villain Iconics even doubling back over a few classes. Might as well progress slowly to whole hog, and gradually update the original Core Iconics to be competitive with the newer ones, even though that isn't hyper-optimized either.
The core iconics are meant to be core only. New iconics are not redone with material after the fact. They are created using material produced up to that point. They aren't rewritten to take advantage of new material years later. That's intentional.
I don't see a need to update any of the iconics. Just make a new character with a different name and backstory. It can be similar, but we don't need rewrites.
I do love seeing how people come up with different versions of a concept. Two-weapon fighting has a lot of potential that isn't even explored, often because people want to optimize for math rather than for a concept. That being said, please continue to post different builds. I really do enjoy seeing different takes on things. It adds to my NPC list.
For TWF, someone recommended to me to use Effortless Lace to make a one-handed weapon act as a light weapon for off hand use. So you could do two Longswords (or some other set up that makes use of Weapon Focus + Weapon Specialization / whatever feat is tied to a specific weapon) fairly early rather than settling for Longsword + Shortsword. [My scenario was looking at Rapiers, but any flavorful one-handed weapon would work.]
Giant Slayer Handbook does not really qualify as Core-only. But you only have so many feats, and otherwise, using two different weapons is pretty inefficient.