We all basiclly agree that two weapon fighting is a bit underpowered when compared to two handed weapon fighting, can we see an upgrade to two weapon fighting? I would like to see being able to make an extra attack on a standard action not just a full round action. I think this would really help out with making two weapon fighting more attactive beyond just coolness (which is important!).
Fizz
Really the only boost I think it needs is for TWF to require one feat which gives you an off-hand attack for every iterative attack so you don't need to waste three feats on it.
Assuming you get a full-attack, your combined weapon damage is marginally superior...
* Longsword + Shortsword = 8 average damage
* Greatsword = 7 average damage
...your strength provides the same relative benefit (one at full + one at half). Despite the fact that we're talking nearly identical damage, you get a -2 to attack for your trouble AND your damage output is noticeably inferior if you're not full-attacking because you don't get to use your off-hand.
Offensively, TWF is flat-out inferior to THF, and yet it costs a feat for the privilege of making a poor choice. Even worse, it costs a feat to be crappy for every iterative attack, unless you're willing to fall even further behind the two-handed fighter. This is assuming the THF is wasting feats too, because otherwise the gap is going to widen even faster.
This doesn't even bring up the issue of cost as you go up in level, having to spend money on two weapons, when weapons are already a very expensive part of your character. Nor does it bring to light the problem that Weapon Focus and its ilk have to be spent in twice the number unless you're willing to go even further behind in damage output and wield two light weapons.
As for Two-Weapon Rend, that doesn't fix it. You have to be inferior for 11 levels to get a marginally useful feat & you still set feats on fire (so you're even more inferior). You're also required to spend significant character resources on Dexterity, which is going to eat into your damage output even further...leading me to believe this feat does nothing except be like Improved Two-Weapon Fighting.
It's like two-weapon fighting is a hazing ritual for the fighter fraternities. Why must you spend resources just to be behind another combat style that doesn't take effort?
Have you seen Two Weapon Rend? Not underpowered anymore. Also there's a feat or two in 3.5 that let you use your off hand basically as a buckler, that's something you can do with a greatsword. :)
Have you read that feat very well yet? Red it again. It only works once in a round, which makes taking twf past normal twf worthless.
They need a way to have at least the possibility to add damage to every attack with two weapon fighting. This is the reason why it was alright for a rogue or scout to get twf before, they had bonus damage to each attack.
Really the only boost I think it needs is for TWF to require one feat which gives you an off-hand attack for every iterative attack so you don't need to waste three feats on it.
I agree whole-heartedly with this statement. Compared to the challenges faced as one progresses in level, the subsequent extra attacks gained with Improved TWF and Greater TWF are less likely to be significant in a battle. Why should a player spend expend their feat selection on feats higher in the feat tree that have a significantly less impact on the battle?
|
They need a way to have at least the possibility to add damage to every attack with two weapon fighting. This is the reason why it was alright for a rogue or scout to get twf before, they had bonus damage to each attack.
How about 2 magical weapons? How about arcane strike? How about weapons training?
Quantity is sometimes a quality. Last night in my AoW game, a cohort with the full Two-Weapon Fighting suite under the effects of righteous wraith of the faithful managed to land 7 hits on a creature with a DR 10/silver. Another NPC with a two handed sword had three attacks on the same creature. on average, after DR, the two-weapon fighter did more damage. The reason, a single miss did not hurt her damage output as badly as the character with the fewer attacks.
This is not always going to be the case, but it is still a factor.
|
|
How about 2 magical weapons? How about arcane strike? How about weapons training?
Enchanting two weapons is actually a drain on resources, rather than a help. The cost of two +2 weapons (16K) is almost enough to get a +3 weapon (18K), and from there on out, it's always cheaper to get a weapon of enhancement X+1 instead of two weapons of enhancement X. By the time you could be buying two +5 weapons, you're actually capable of buying a +7 weapon, and so on. (Two +7 weapons are only 4K shy of being the same cost as one +10 weapon...) So your attack bonuses are falling further and further behind the one-weapon user, even above and beyond the -2 penalty you're taking on every swing.
Arcane strike - well, that depends on whether you mean the Paizo version or the Complete Warrior version. I think the CompWar version is for an entire round, which would make it worthwhile; the Pathfinder version is much too small a bonus to really have much impact. I am curious to see whether the Vital Strike feats help at all, though...
Weapons training is problematic because of the general weakness of light weapons for damage purposes. Typically, the usual pairing is a one-handed weapon and a light weapon - but those are different categories, which weakens the benefit of weapon training, as well as the effects of Weapon Focus or Weapon Specialization, etc. Trading out for two light weapons takes care of that problem, but further reduces the damage you deal. Meanwhile, the two-handed guy is riding his maxed weapon training all the way.
Enchanting two weapons is actually a drain on resources, rather than a help. The cost of two +2 weapons (16K) is almost enough to get a +3 weapon (18K), and from there on out, it's always cheaper to get a weapon of enhancement X+1 instead of two weapons of enhancement X.
Oddly enough, two-weapon fighting has the advantage here. This is because all of the weapon qualities (except the attack bonus) *stacks* when comparing to two-handed fighting.
For instance:
36K for two +1 flaming, shocking one-handed weapons
vs.
32k for a +1 flaming, shocking, frost two-handed weapon.
Taking the weapon examples above, per iterative attack:
1d8+1 longsword + 1d6+1 short sword + 2d6 fire + 2d6 shock = 24 average
vs.
2d6+1 greatsword + 1d6 fire + 1d6 cold + 1d6 shock = 18.5 average
Anything a two-weapon fighter can stack onto both weapons at once counts double compared to a two-hander (minus a % for the -2 attacks of course). Dualing the same weapon type - weapon spec counts double, plus weapon training double stacks nicely as well.
Also - weapon swap means you don't actually have to *pay* for that second weapon - just transfer from one hand to the other.
However the strongest thing I've seen in favor of two-weapon fighters is the new Improved Vital Strike. Sacrifice your two worst attacks, add 2d8 or 2d6 to *every* attack. Nice.
I did a statistical analysis for a 13th-level Fighter to compare damage output of two-handed weapon (greatsword) vs two-weapon fighting (two bastard sword). Two-weapon fighting seems to deal more damage than two-handed
The average damage in a full-round, accounting for chance of hitting for a 13th-level Fighter:
Two-Weapon : 57
Two-Handed : 52.5
This statistical analysis use average damage (middle of the probability curve) and account of hitting chances. (95% of hitting = 95% damage)
I also use optimized power attack with both type of fighter, which means the best damage output for the best chance of hitting.
I did not take in account critical hits and DR.
I use AC range from AC1 to AC45.
Fighter are built with feats for maximum attack bonus and damage output (weap.focus tree).
The analysis don't includes magic properties or masterwork properties.
Fighter are built with 3.5 rules (PFRPG is still alpha)
Fighters are flanking.
Fighters have 20STR.
I did a statistical analysis for a 13th-level Fighter to compare damage output of two-handed weapon (greatsword) vs two-weapon fighting (two bastard sword). Two-weapon fighting seems to deal more damage than two-handed
But two bastard swords would be at -4/-4 to attack and cost a feat to use them as one handed. Unless I'm mistaken, then move along.
TWF needs to be as beneficial to use as using a two-handed weapon, but cannot be more powerful either. This is the main problem. How to make TWF worthwhile without making it overpowered. It's a really hard balancing act for designers because of the number of feats and abilities that can add to both, and the different types of characters, choices and weapons available. I'm certain that for every character who has suffered from using TWF there has been a character who has excelled when fighting with two weapons.
TW-Rend is a good option for making TWF better, as is a feat or ability that allows you to use both weapons as a standard action. making TWF easier to use is also another option, but from experience I can tell you using two weapons at once is a lot harder than using one weapon and when swinging a single weapon with two arms you can hit harder.
This is where threads on this site work at cross-purposes to each other. Look around at some of the other posts about barbarians or sneak attacks. For every person who is upset about TWF there is someone pointing out the damage that a rogue can do with TWF and sneak attack.
Also, what about poor old characters who use a weapon and shield. Making TWF even better will doubtless harm this combination even more, forcing those people to complain that they need to make the combination more powerful.
There is no one true solution to this problem, because as soon as someone "fixes" TWF there will be someone complaining that it is too powerful. You know it and I know it. It's almost like the old Cold War arms race. Everyone wants to make sure that their option is as powerful if not more powerful than everyone else's.
Hopefully, no one is making an argument for TWF simply so they can slice through 10,000 orcs with two scimitars at once!
That drow has a lot to answer for.
Here's how I think Two-Weapon Fighting should work.
Normal Rules:
- Using a weapon in the offhand untrained will reduce your attack by -4 on both hands (similar to non-proficiency).
- Add an additional -2 on your attacks for using a light weapon, or -4 if using a medium weapon. Can't use a large (twohanded) weapon.
- On a successful attack with your main hand, you also roll damage for the offhand weapon. You can decide which weapon is your main hand from attack to attack, the offhand damage is rolled as a separate attack (essentially treated as an autohit).
- Offhand damage is treated as added damage to the main hand attack. IE, it's not a separate attack, so don't add additional Sneak Attack damage, precision damage, etc. Add any damage inherent to the weapon, and one-half strength damage.
Apply the offhand weapon damage separately for purposes of DR, miss chance (ghost touch weapon, etc).
.
Feats
Two Weapon Fighting
Remove the -4 proficiency penalty. Also, you gain the following options with your offhand attacks:
- Forgo offhand damage and increase your attack bonus on all attacks by +2 until the beginning of your next turn.
- Forgo offhand damage and gain +2 shield AC until the beginning of your next turn.
Improved Two Weapon Fighting
Remove an addtional -2 penalty (can use Light weapons without penalty, Medium weapons with only -2 penalty). Also, instead of adding offhand weapon damage to your attacks, you may make additional attacks with your offhand weapon as separate attacks.
Improved Two Weapon Defense
When forgoing your offhand weapon for damage, you may gain an additional +3 shield AC (for a total of +5).
Improved Two Weapon Strike
When forgoing your offhand weapon for damage, you may gain an additional +3 attack bonus on all attacks (for a total of +5).
---------------------------------------------------------------
What this does is gives two weapon fighting as a standard similar damage to a Two Handed Fighter. You have potential to get more damage out of it (by spending more money than the THF), however there's penalty to attack.
Also, you don't get extra sneak attack damage, etc... so it's locking it into more similar damage.
The TWF feat would then not only remove the standard penalty, but also give more options in combat with that offhand weapon. Personally, I think offhand weapons were used more for those situations (defense, or opening up holes in an opponent's defense) so the person who's trained in two weapons should get those options.
Since THF doesn't have to spend a feat to be used without penalty (removing -4), the TWF feat needs a bit extra anyways. It NEEDS to cost something to be effective, but shouldn't automatically mean they are behind.
Improved TWF gives the Rogue back his extra sneak attack damage... At the cost of a feat. It also gives an extra penalty removal, so you aren't just buying back everything from before for no other bonus.
...
Just some ideas I had for TWF.
I use AC range from AC1 to AC45.I would try running this again, staying within the range of AC 25-32 (where nearly all CR 13 monsters are, according to the SRD). Both abnormally low and abnormally high ACs unrealistically favor two-weapon fighting, particularly where Power Attack is involved.
Both TWF and THW are the same at range AC25 to AC32.
Average damage output: 26
(And penalty of -4/-4 are include for fighting with two bastard sword)
Really the only boost I think it needs is for TWF to require one feat which gives you an off-hand attack for every iterative attack so you don't need to waste three feats on it.I agree whole-heartedly with this statement. Compared to the challenges faced as one progresses in level, the subsequent extra attacks gained with Improved TWF and Greater TWF are less likely to be significant in a battle. Why should a player spend expend their feat selection on feats higher in the feat tree that have a significantly less impact on the battle?
Please consider the impact that that feat would have on rangers.
Oddly enough, two-weapon fighting has the advantage here. This is because all of the weapon qualities (except the attack bonus) *stacks* when comparing to two-handed fighting.
For instance:
36K for two +1 flaming, shocking one-handed weapons
vs.
32k for a +1 flaming, shocking, frost two-handed weapon.Taking the weapon examples above, per iterative attack:
1d8+1 longsword + 1d6+1 short sword + 2d6 fire + 2d6 shock = 24 average
vs.
2d6+1 greatsword + 1d6 fire + 1d6 cold + 1d6 shock = 18.5 average
Two things: with a Fighter Power Attack build with a two handed weapon has every incentive in the world to up his attack rolls due to the massive return on damage that brings, without the pesky energy immunities. Thus, the better comparison is that second fighter power attacking such that his Power Attack BAB is equal to the BAB penalty for TWF:
36K for two +1 flaming, shocking one-handed weapons (or 2 +3 weapons)
vs.
32k for a +4 two-handed weapon for 2d6+4 greatsword + 15 (Power Attack for 3 to equalize the BAB for the attack bonuses with TWF's weapon enhancement and Power Attack 2 to equalize the lost BAB for TWFing in the first place.
So, you get 24 average for the TWF vs. 26 average from the second fighter, who has exactly the same feats invested and same attack bonus.
More numbers
RANGE AC25 to AC32
13th-level
Flanking
=====
FIGHTER (5STR)
TWF (with PA, bastard swords): 25.7
TWF (with PA, short swords): 28.6
THW (with PA): 25.9
OHW (with PA): 20.7
TWF (bastard): 25.7
TWF (short): 28.6
THW: 25.7
OHW: 20.7
PA is optimized for to-hit vs damage
Two interesting notes:
- PA is not useful at this AC range
- More damage output with two shortsword than with two bastard swords (with complete weapon focus tree with selected weapon, not enoug feat to take it for two different weapon) because of off-hand penalty.
=====
=====
ROGUE (10STR, 20DEX)
TWF (with sneak): 24.5
THW (with sneak): 9.3
OHW (with sneak): 17
TWF: 3
THW: 2
OHW: 2.1
(rogue is not proficient with two-handed weapon, -4)
=====
=====
RANGER (18STR)
TWF (fav enemy): 24.9
THW (fav enemy): 21.7
OHW (fav enemy): 17.7
TWF : 14.2
THW: 14.9
OHW: 10.9
(The Ranger use bastard/short sword combo, or greatsword. With weap.focus feat)
=====
- TWF vs THW seems balanced. OHW is weaker (but allows higher AC with the use of shield)
- The only place where I think it is a little bit unbalanced is with the TWF Rogue in a position to sneak.
- A tweak I proposed in another thread would average this damage: ROGUE TWF (with sneak): 21.4
If it's underpowered then I am happy!
There are just two many frickin' TWfighters out their who think it's just sooooo cool two wield two swords.
Get Sword and Board pushed I say!
No honestly. I would like to see some bigger rework on the styles:
Twohanded - Less defense, more damage
Onehanded - more agility, free hand for other actions (grapple, magic)
Two-weapon - hinder enemy, improved to-hit chances (instead of extra attack stuff!)
Shield - better defense, special shield actions
No honestly. I would like to see some bigger rework on the styles:
Don't count on it. PFRPG must be compatible with 3.5 material.
You know, if there are two phrases I could go the rest of my roleplaying life without every hearing again, its "gish" and "sword and board."
Oddly enough, two-weapon fighting has the advantage here. This is because all of the weapon qualities (except the attack bonus) *stacks* when comparing to two-handed fighting.
Two things: with a Fighter Power Attack build with a two handed weapon has every incentive in the world to up his attack rolls due to the massive return on damage that brings, without the pesky energy immunities. Thus, the better comparison is that second fighter power attacking such that his Power Attack BAB is equal to the BAB penalty for TWF:
36K for two +1 flaming, shocking one-handed weapons (or 2 +3 weapons)
vs.
32k for a +4 two-handed weapon for 2d6+4 greatsword + 15 (Power Attack for 3 to equalize the BAB for the attack bonuses with TWF's weapon enhancement and Power Attack 2 to equalize the lost BAB for TWFing in the first place.So, you get 24 average for the TWF vs. 26 average from the second fighter, who has exactly the same feats invested and same attack bonus.
Quite possible I'm missing something, but why did you triple the power attack instead of double? (bolded above). With just double you get TWF 24 vs. THF 21.
Great idea evening the attack bonuses with power attack. If you stick to the original example, you'd get TWF 24 vs. THF 22.5.
Any way you look at it, they are close, which is a good thing.
Yeah, I just read Two Weapon Rend, with the exception of that crappy two light weapon fighting feat requirment it does make Two Weapon Fighting worth while.
The only problem with beefing up TWF isn't the fighter: it's the rogue.
While Fighters are the feat monkies, the iconic TWF (iconic in the sense of characters using it), is the rogue.
Double SA is already bad enough, but if you beef up the base damage and such (or worse- beef up the to-hit probability) then it just gets worse.
If you are to do this at all, I would propose a fighter/ranger only feat chain of some sort- Not general feats.