This was needed to rework two weapon fighting so it is at least to par with two handed weapon fighting a bit for low levels. So here it is.
Page 251
Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get
one extra attack per round with that weapon. If you have the
two weapon fighting feat you may make as many attacks
with your primary hand as your off hand, You suffera
–5 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your
primary hand and a –9 penalty to the attack with your
off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these
penalties in two ways. First, if your off-hand weapon is
light, the penalties are reduced by 1 each. An unarmed
strike is always considered light. Second, the Two-Weapon
Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 4, and
the off-hand penalty by 8.
If you try to perform an attack that would deal precision
damage you will take a -4 penalty to hit with both attacks.
You must declare before the attack is made whether or not
you are trying to perform an attack to deal precision damage.
Normally you may only perform precision damage with your
primary hand.
Table 9–7 summarizes the interaction of all these factors.
Table 9–7: Two-Weapon Fighting Penalties
Circumstances Primary Hand Off Hand
Normal effects –5 –9
Off-hand weapon is light –4 –8
Two-Weapon Fighting feat +0 +0
Off-hand weapon is light and +1 +1
Note: Due to the low minimum damage, and the low adverage damage, I had the two one handed use have a +1 to hit, and a light off handed weapon have +2 to hit. I reduced it being a bit concervative, but if you think it might still be a tad too week, please change it back.
Feats
Two-Weapon Fighting (Combat)
You can fight with a weapon in each hand. You can make
one extra attack each round with the second weapon.
Prerequisite: Dex 17, Str 13
Benefit: Your penalties on attack rolls for fighting with
two weapons are reduced. The penalty for your primary hand
lessens by 6 and the one for your off hand lessens by 10. See
Two-Weapon Fighting in Chapter 9.
Special: If you have weapon finesse you may ignore the
strength requirement for this feat.
Extra Precision Attack (Combat)
You can deal extra precision attacks with two weapon fighting
Prerequisite: Dex 17, Two Weapon Fighting Feat
Benefit: You may now perform one attack with precision with
your offhand attack gained fro two weapon fighting.
Improved Extra Precision Attack (Combat)
You can deal extra precision attacks with two weapon fighting
Prerequisite: Dex 17, Base Attack +6 Two Weapon Fighting Feat
Benefit: You may now perform two additional attacks with
precision with your offhand attack gained fro two weapon fighting.
Superior Extra Precision Attack (Combat)
You can deal extra precision attacks with two weapon fighting
Prerequisite: Dex 19, Base Attack +11 Two Weapon Fighting Feat
Benefit: You may now perform as many additional attacks with
precision with your offhand as your primary gained from your attacks
gained fro two weapon fighting.
End Results
Comparison between Two Handed Weapon Fighting, and Two Weapon Fighting
Two Handed Weapon Fighting
Using maximum 1st level Stats
After 1 feat purchase
Weapon: Great Sword
Feat: Overhand Chop
Damage: 2D6+10
Range: 12- 22
Average: 17
To Hit: +0 differance
Two Weapon Fighting
Using maximum 1st level Stats
After 1 feat purchase
Weapon: 2 Long Swords
Feat: Two Weapon Fighting
Damage: 2D8+7
Range: 9- 23
Average: 16
To Hit: +0
Weapon: Long Sword + Short Sword
Feat: Two Weapon Fighting
Damage: 1D8+1D6+7
Range: 9 - 21
Average: 15
To Hit: +1
Improved Two Weapon Fighting
You learn to perform multiple attacks with greater efficiency
Prerequisite: Base Attack +6, Two Weapon Style
Benefit: While wielding two weapons in melee, and nether are shields, you gain a +2 on all attacks gained from the improvement of base attack bonus to both primary and off hand attacks. This bonus does not apply to their initial two attacks.
Example: When a fighter gets a base attack bonus of 6 he has a bonus of +3 on his second attack instead of only +1. When they reach +11, the second round of attack will be +8, and third would be +3 to hit, and so on.
Two Weapon Trickster
Using two weapons you find better ways to perform specific combat maneuvers.
Prerequisite: Base Attack +5, Two Weapon Fighting, and any improved bonus feat for a combat maneuver that takes an attack action (Improved Disarm, Improved Sunder, or Improved Trip).
Benefit: While attempting a combat maneuvers with two melee weapons, you gain a +2 on each attempt you make so long as you have the improved feat coinciding with that the maneuver. This however does not work with a shield. This bonus increases by +1 for every additional attack past the first that you gained from two weapon fighting.
Special: You can not take this feat multiple times to have it apply to a separate combat maneuver. If have more than one improved combat maneuver listed in the requirements, or you later obtain one of those feats, the effects of this feat applies automatically. If you have improved unarmed strike this may also be used with improved grapple so long as you are unarmed when you perform the action.
Two Weapon Focus Mastery (Idea from Kirth Gersen)
You knowledge in fighting with one weapon has been expanded to work with a different weapon at the same time.
Prerequisite: Two Weapon Style, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization.
Benefit: While using two weapons with the two weapon style feat you now gain the effects of the weapon focus and weapons specialization feats, as well as their improved versions to one other weapon type that is not a one handed weapon. This only works while both weapons are being used in two weapon style and while in melee. So long as the off hand weapon is light and the primary hand weapon is one handed they gain an additional +1 to hit as they are even harder to predict and defend against.
Example: A fighter has weapon specialization in a bastard sword. He takes this feat and chooses a dagger as his secondary weapon. While using
Special: This feat does work with shields
I prefer this option, removing the normal feats of TWF, Imp TWF, Gtr TWF (somewhat modified from elsewhere, I forget the original). I do like your other
Two-Weapon Fighting [General]
Prerequisite: Dex 15
Benefit: You suffer no penalty for doing things with your off-hand. When you make an attack or full-attack action, you may make a number of attacks with your off-hand weapon equal to the number of attacks you are afforded with your primary weapon, at the same attack bonus.
I prefer this option, removing the normal feats of TWF, Imp TWF, Gtr TWF (somewhat modified from elsewhere, I forget the original). I do like your other
Two-Weapon Fighting [General]
Prerequisite: Dex 15
Benefit: You suffer no penalty for doing things with your off-hand. When you make an attack or full-attack action, you may make a number of attacks with your off-hand weapon equal to the number of attacks you are afforded with your primary weapon, at the same attack bonus.
I am sorry but I am sure you would like that, if you want to be a god rogue. The entire reason for nerfing TWF in 3.5 was to keep the rogue from getting too powerful. So the rest of the classes suffered.
Here are my arguments for making this feat give at the very least a +1 to hit with two one handed weapons.
* 1. You still have a much smaller amount of minimum damage, not enough to counter act the possible higher damage at this level.
* 2. You still have two stat requirements you must have reasonably high.
Weapon cost is still a problem, but that can be fixed with a new magic item made to help mediate this problem. If this is not taken car of then this needs to be and additional +1 for ever additional attack they due to base attack bonus, at the very LEAST.
|
Here are my arguments for making this feat give at the very least a +1 to hit with two one handed weapons.
* 1. You still have a much smaller amount of minimum damage, not enough to counter act the possible higher damage at this level.
* 2. You still have two stat requirements you must have reasonably high.Weapon cost is still a problem, but that can be fixed with a new magic item made to help mediate this problem. If this is not taken car of then this needs to be and additional +1 for ever additional attack they due to base attack bonus, at the very LEAST.
The lower minimum dmg from light weapons is typically offest by the higher crit range (I'm look'n at you rapier). When combined with Improved crit or Keen, this take certain weapons into the 30% crit range.
If you let a rogue have 3+2 attacks at +0 instead of -2, that could be an incredible amount of damage just from sneak attacks...with a significantly increased chance to hit with all 5 attacks.
Rogue sneak attack damage ruins lots of balance. They are overpowered at upper levels even compared to a wizard...I would say +1d6/rogue level per round, choose how to separate the damage inflicted. That would balance it. But it's nowhere near backwards compatible, so I deal with it.
I would probably not adopt these in my campaign. Rogues have enough trouble lining up full attacks with SA without adding this on top to further complicate it.
-S
I would probably not adopt these in my campaign. Rogues have enough trouble lining up full attacks with SA without adding this on top to further complicate it.
-S
I agree that on paper it looks complicated, but in actuallity it is better for rogues on a few accounts. This is basically identical complexity to the original two weapon fighting, +2 more defining rules.
I now notice that I made the minus too high than I had planed, as the original version. It is now supposed to be -2 to hit. Sorry my bad.
1. With the correction, it grants rogues less of a minus to hit, even while sneak attacking.
2. It gives them an alternative way of fighting even if the target is immune to sneak attacks.
3. If they don't have the feats for the extra sneak attack damage, then they still get the bonus attacks automatically.
Note I didn't make sneak attacking a swift action or anything gimping like that.
|
|
I would probably not adopt these in my campaign. Rogues have enough trouble lining up full attacks with SA without adding this on top to further complicate it.
-S
I agree that on paper it looks complicated, but in actuallity it is better for rogues on a few accounts. This is basically identical complexity to the original two weapon fighting, +2 more defining rules.
I now notice that I made the minus too high than I had planed, as the original version. It is now supposed to be -2 to hit. Sorry my bad.
1. With the correction, it grants rogues less of a minus to hit, even while sneak attacking.
2. It gives them an alternative way of fighting even if the target is immune to sneak attacks.
3. If they don't have the feats for the extra sneak attack damage, then they still get the bonus attacks automatically.Note I didn't make sneak attacking a swift action or anything gimping like that.
Pathfinder Rogues have already gotten a huge boost. Between Rogue talents, and the ability to sneak attack almost anything, they are brutal now.
The lower minimum dmg from light weapons is typically offest by the higher crit range (I'm look'n at you rapier). When combined with Improved crit or Keen, this take certain weapons into the 30% crit range.
Ummm... the falchion? As far as martial weapons, the crit range is the same... You can't just state that because there is one more one handed weapon with a crit range of 18-20
If you let a rogue have 3+2 attacks at +0 instead of -2, that could be an incredible amount of damage just from sneak attacks...with a significantly increased chance to hit with all 5 attacks.
I don't follow, please explain? A level 1 rogue trying to perform two sneak attacks would perform two sneak attacks would first need to have two feats, Two Weapon Fighting and Extra Precision Attack, and should have a -3 to hit or -4 with two one handed weapon.
Rogue sneak attack damage ruins lots of balance. They are overpowered at upper levels even compared to a wizard...I would say +1d6/rogue level per round, choose how to separate the damage inflicted. That would balance it. But it's nowhere near backwards compatible, so I deal with it.
Hmmm... I would have to say that it does keep it a bit more to par with the extra feat requirement. Its up to Jason as maybe a -3, or keep the current -4 for precision attacks may be needed.
Pathfinder Rogues have already gotten a huge boost. Between Rogue talents, and the ability to sneak attack almost anything, they are brutal now.I would probably not adopt these in my campaign. Rogues have enough trouble lining up full attacks with SA without adding this on top to further complicate it.
-S
I agree that on paper it looks complicated, but in actuallity it is better for rogues on a few accounts. This is basically identical complexity to the original two weapon fighting, +2 more defining rules.
I now notice that I made the minus too high than I had planed, as the original version. It is now supposed to be -2 to hit. Sorry my bad.
1. With the correction, it grants rogues less of a minus to hit, even while sneak attacking.
2. It gives them an alternative way of fighting even if the target is immune to sneak attacks.
3. If they don't have the feats for the extra sneak attack damage, then they still get the bonus attacks automatically.Note I didn't make sneak attacking a swift action or anything gimping like that.
So if Jason suggests that this makes them too powerful, then the minus should be -3, -4 if the +1 increase is approved.
Hexen, unless I seriously misread your post (and maybe I did), you include two feats to specifically allow rogues to do what they already can do- that is, precision attack with offhand attacks.
Again if I misread I apologize, but that is where my comment came from.
Requiring them to take 2 additional feats (that is, in addition to the rest of the chain) just to get something that's situational at best in the first place, doesn't to me seem like a good deal.
And on re-read, yep. Your new writeup makes them take additional penalties for SA. I wouldn't adopt that in my campaign.
-S
I am going to wade into the something I have not analyzed. This seems to be to make the 'affect the same' between these weapon styles.
I always imagined that using big, two handed weapons should have a different effect than using two small weapons. Namely, 2 handers should have a smaller chance to hit but do more damage. TWF should give you a better chance to hit but less damage. Players choose what is most fun for them; do you want to do more damage or have a better chance to hit?
I know their needs to be some balance to prevent Munchkin abuse and the effects of higher levels but why do two different weapon styles seem to have the same end result? Should not the goal to make fighting with these different styles, different? I return you to your regularly scheduled thread.
Hexen, unless I seriously misread your post (and maybe I did), you include two feats to specifically allow rogues to do what they already can do- that is, precision attack with offhand attacks.
Again if I misread I apologize, but that is where my comment came from.
Requiring them to take 2 additional feats (that is, in addition to the rest of the chain) just to get something that's situational at best in the first place, doesn't to me seem like a good deal.
And on re-read, yep. Your new writeup makes them take additional penalties for SA. I wouldn't adopt that in my campaign.
-S
If you read the two weapon fighting section I reworked two weapon fighting section so that normally you can only perform precision attacks with your primary hand. This makes doing it with your off hand cost you a feat.
So yeah it does cost a bit more, but you get the option of switching to normal attacks, with a bonus to hit instead of a minus, when the target can't be effected by sneak attack damage or has a too high AC.
As IS they would have probably a -1 to hit instead of a -2, or a -2 instead of a -4 if they use two one handed weapons. That alone is worth more than 1 feat in equivalence. As stated above rogues did get a great boost in their class, and the fact that a lot more targets are valuable to them.
P.S.
So I admit it does slow their effectiveness in the short run, but makes them better combat and flexibility wise as a whole.
I am going to wade into the something I have not analyzed. This seems to be to make the 'affect the same' between these weapon styles.
I always imagined that using big, two handed weapons should have a different effect than using two small weapons. Namely, 2 handers should have a smaller chance to hit but do more damage. TWF should give you a better chance to hit but less damage. Players choose what is most fun for them; do you want to do more damage or have a better chance to hit?
I know their needs to be some balance to prevent Munchkin abuse and the effects of higher levels but why do two different weapon styles seem to have the same end result? Should not the goal to make fighting with these different styles, different? I return you to your regularly scheduled thread.
Yes I agree, two weapon fighting should have a better chance to hit but less damage. While it starts out with them having a chance of more damage, they quickly get left in the dust after the next feat or two with a two handed weapon in the damage department.
P.S.
After that I also mitigated them a select set of combat maneuvers in other feats.
Edited
___________________________________________
Page 251
Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. If you have the two weapon fighting feat you may make as many attacks with your primary hand as your off hand, You suffer a –4 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –5 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties with the Two-Weapon Fighting feat. This lessens the primary hand penalty by 4, and the off-hand penalty by 5. If your off-hand weapon is light, you gain a bonus of 1 to each attack, primary and off hand. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Table 9–7 summarizes the interaction of all these factors.
If you try to perform an attack that would deal precision damage you will take a -2 penalty to hit with both attacks. You must declare before the attack is made whether or not you are trying to perform an attack to deal precision damage. Normally you may only perform precision damage with your primary hand.
Table 9–7: Two-Weapon Fighting Penalties
Circumstances Primary Hand Off Hand
Normal effects –4 –5
Off-hand weapon is light –3 –4
Two-Weapon Fighting feat +0 +0
Off-hand weapon is light and +1 +1
Feats
Two-Weapon Fighting (Combat)
You can fight with a weapon in each hand. You can make
one extra attack each round with the second weapon.
Prerequisite: Dex 13 and Str 13, or 15 Dex
Benefit: Your penalties on attack rolls for fighting with
two weapons are reduced. The penalty for your primary hand
lessens by 4 and the one for your off hand lessens by 5. See
Two-Weapon Fighting in Chapter 9.
Shameless bump. Looking to see what people think of the edited version.
Well, again- I don't understand why you are messing around with the primary dual wielding class.
It would be like removing the 1.5str mod to 2h weapons and then making it a feat and claiming you've somehow improved their lot in life.
It isn't an improvement. You are still making the primary users of the feat take an extra feat in order to do what they already *can* do.
I admit you are increasing the attack bonus somewhat but getting a full attack in with the rogue is already difficult enough as it is, without adding feat requirements so in those rare cases it Does happen, they can do it effectively.
Feats to make TWF better, I don't really have a problem with.. But if they at the same time nerf the primary TWF'ers (i.e the rogues) then it becomes problematic for me.
-S
Well, again- I don't understand why you are messing around with the primary dual wielding class.
It would be like removing the 1.5str mod to 2h weapons and then making it a feat and claiming you've somehow improved their lot in life.
It isn't an improvement. You are still making the primary users of the feat take an extra feat in order to do what they already *can* do.
I admit you are increasing the attack bonus somewhat but getting a full attack in with the rogue is already difficult enough as it is, without adding feat requirements so in those rare cases it Does happen, they can do it effectively.
Feats to make TWF better, I don't really have a problem with.. But if they at the same time nerf the primary TWF'ers (i.e the rogues) then it becomes problematic for me.
-S
You know, TWF was made so overly specialized and reduced in power due to one class while so many other classes really wanted to use it. This made far less sense. What is gained is actually far greater than the cost of one feat, and makes a rogue better suited for when their sneak attacks can't do anything. Giving them the same power plus the added bonuses would be far past broken if it was essentially for free.
Now I can see your very much tied up with rogues, and you like them a lot. You have had it good for a while, but now it is time to share the fighting style a bit.
Here are the bonuses you gain when compared to the previous feat tree.
1. Gain attacks automatically.
2. Bonus to hit instead of minus when targets are immune to sneak attacks.
3. Penalties reduced while sneak attacking in comparison to how they were before.
Having to be targeted with the extra feats for the sneak attack damage is just giving it the proper respect in power that it deserves. The long list of minuses to hit and progressively worse feats, that didn't even go to the full base attack bonus. So I think the extra feat cost is well warranted.
Sir Hexen,
First I think this is workable... I haven't playtested it yet, but sitting here mathing it out and mulling it over, it makes sense, it has flavor, and it doesn't seem mechanicallyl unsound. It also isn't that complicated IF people are willing to just let go of the current TWF.
Having said that I think you are fighting a very uphill battle. The current TWF system, while far from good has the combined inertia of being here already and laziness from people not willing to try and learn another new system to do something they can do and are content with already.
However I wish you well in your endeavor.
Sir Hexen,
First I think this is workable... I haven't playtested it yet, but sitting here mathing it out and mulling it over, it makes sense, it has flavor, and it doesn't seem mechanicallyl unsound. It also isn't that complicated IF people are willing to just let go of the current TWF.
Having said that I think you are fighting a very uphill battle. The current TWF system, while far from good has the combined inertia of being here already and laziness from people not willing to try and learn another new system to do something they can do and are content with already.
However I wish you well in your endeavor.
Thank you. Look forward to hearing about your play test, if you find the time.
Actually- I haven't played a rogue.
Ever.
(not counting a 1 level dip in a campaign that didn't go past 4th level..)
I just don't see a need to nerf them. They are a good solid class right now. Not OP, not UP. But just about right.
I don't see the need to buff them.. at all. or the need to nerf them.
This feat is a slight buff. a little extra attacks. Its a serious nerf though in the fact that it requires them to take *extra feats* to do what they already accomplish.
If you want an extra feat to give TWF'ers some extra bonus to their attacks then just do it. You don't need to go through the extra effort of screwing over Rogues in the process.
The vast majority of the time the Rogue is getting 1 good shot off per round. In the rare cases he gets to full attack, he doesn't really need the added nerf of yet another feat in order to use his ONLY combat ability. It isn't like SA is an option. If the rogue isn't doing SA then he isn't really doing any damage. The higher level you get, the more this is the case.
I'm not against change in general and I'm not "in love with" the rogue. I just don't agree that the changes you've presented here are necessary.
-S
________________________________________
Page 251
Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. If you have the two weapon fighting feat you may make as many attacks with your primary hand as your off hand, You suffer a –4 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –5 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties with the Two-Weapon Fighting feat. This lessens the primary hand penalty by 4, and the off-hand penalty by 5. If your off-hand weapon is light, you gain a bonus of 1 to each attack, primary and off hand. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Table 9–7 summarizes the interaction of all these factors.
If you try to perform an attack that would deal precision damage you will take a -2 penalty to hit with both attacks. You must declare before the attack is made whether or not you are trying to perform an attack to deal precision damage. Normally you may only perform precision damage with your primary hand.
Table 9–7: Two-Weapon Fighting Penalties
Circumstances Primary Hand Off Hand
Normal effects –4 –5
Off-hand weapon is light –3 –4
Two-Weapon Fighting feat +0 +0
Off-hand weapon is light and +1 +1
Feats
Two-Weapon Fighting (Combat)
You can fight with a weapon in each hand. You can make
one extra attack each round with the second weapon.
Prerequisite: Dex 13 and Str 13, or 15 Dex
Benefit: Your penalties on attack rolls for fighting with
two weapons are reduced. The penalty for your primary hand
lessens by 4 and the one for your off hand lessens by 5. Performing one attack with your primary and your offhand weapon is now a single attack action. See Two-Weapon Fighting in Chapter 9.
Actually- I haven't played a rogue.
Ever.
(not counting a 1 level dip in a campaign that didn't go past 4th level..)
I just don't see a need to nerf them. They are a good solid class right now. Not OP, not UP. But just about right.
I don't see the need to buff them.. at all. or the need to nerf them.
This feat is a slight buff. a little extra attacks. Its a serious nerf though in the fact that it requires them to take *extra feats* to do what they already accomplish.If you want an extra feat to give TWF'ers some extra bonus to their attacks then just do it. You don't need to go through the extra effort of screwing over Rogues in the process.
The vast majority of the time the Rogue is getting 1 good shot off per round. In the rare cases he gets to full attack, he doesn't really need the added nerf of yet another feat in order to use his ONLY combat ability. It isn't like SA is an option. If the rogue isn't doing SA then he isn't really doing any damage. The higher level you get, the more this is the case.
I'm not against change in general and I'm not "in love with" the rogue. I just don't agree that the changes you've presented here are necessary.
-S
Now I am going to make this brief. This is by any means a nerf. A rogue will eventually gain all the abilities they did in previous version of two weapon fighting, and a list of abilities that are worth 2 or 3 class features by the measuring standards of WotC.
1. You can attack twice now with sneak attacks as if it were a standard attack action.
2. Minuses to hit with sneak attacks are reduced unless god only knows why they use two one handed weapons. This is directly helping rogues here.
3. They have an attack action with two weapons even if the target is immune to sneak attacks. In comparison, your getting a +flipin 3 to hit here on these targets!!!
4. You gain attacks automatically when you base attack bonus gets to the right point.
At least one of these is something any rogue would pick up any ways as a feat or even a class feature if they had the option.
I will grant you that it might make their progression of power start out a TAD slower at 1st and 2nd level, BUT!!! at higher levels they will be even more powerful than they were before (levels 3-5+). So if they are mechanically more powerful than what they were then there is no way this is a nerf. So unless you back this up with something I have missed, please, stop using the DnD equivalent of a godwin of a phrase "nerf".
P.S.
If you want a clear look at a nerf, just look at power attack and combat expertise, now those are nerfs.
This isn't a gripe- it's a confusion.
You've gone in your first post- which created an issue where rogues were nerfed due to having to spend several feats to get what they already get..
To the current incarnation, where they not only get to make 2 attacks as a standard action but they get +1 to attacks when before they were at -2?
Did I miss something? Am I reading it correctly?
-S
This isn't a gripe- it's a confusion.
You've gone in your first post- which created an issue where rogues were nerfed due to having to spend several feats to get what they already get..
To the current incarnation, where they not only get to make 2 attacks as a standard action but they get +1 to attacks when before they were at -2?
Did I miss something? Am I reading it correctly?
-S
Yep. Now you have not missed a thing, except that they have to take a -3 to hit to sneak attacking, bring it to a bonus of -2 if off hand weapon is light.
Why pick on the rogue though?
Why not just leave off the rogue-specific language and make it a broad use TWF feat?
Why make life harder for them than it is?
I do realize my "approval" isn't necessary, I'm just confused why you hate the rogue so much as to want to rewrite the entire TWF feat line just to screw with their attack bonuses..
Personally? I'd rather leave it as it is now, where everyone already knows what the bonuses are, than to fiddle with it to little effect but to hose the one class most likely to use it.
-S
Why pick on the rogue though?
Why not just leave off the rogue-specific language and make it a broad use TWF feat?
Why make life harder for them than it is?
I do realize my "approval" isn't necessary, I'm just confused why you hate the rogue so much as to want to rewrite the entire TWF feat line just to screw with their attack bonuses..
Personally? I'd rather leave it as it is now, where everyone already knows what the bonuses are, than to fiddle with it to little effect but to hose the one class most likely to use it.
-S
Its not that I hate the rogue, I tried to keep them as much to par with the way things were. The feat originally was for the most part nerfed due to the power sneak attack gets for double attacking. I may have powered them down at the lower levels, but this was for simplicity only, and was nothing malicful. I actually just made a ton of mistakes rewriting the two weapon fighting feat. I first tried a separate feat for none rogues, but this added way too much text and complexity, so the minor nerf at early levels is just to try and keep things simple. The amount of power I gave them required a extra feat cost, but that was it.
In conclusion, rogue are fine as is with TWF. I tried for them to keep that power, not gain any, but not lose any, and make it viable for other classes to use; I think I did alright in these manors.
I prefer this option, removing the normal feats of TWF, Imp TWF, Gtr TWF (somewhat modified from elsewhere, I forget the original). I do like your other
Two-Weapon Fighting [General]
Prerequisite: Dex 15
Benefit: You suffer no penalty for doing things with your off-hand. When you make an attack or full-attack action, you may make a number of attacks with your off-hand weapon equal to the number of attacks you are afforded with your primary weapon, at the same attack bonus.
K.I.S.S. in action here, KUTGW Virgil. :)
K.I.S.S. in action here, KUTGW Virgil. :)I prefer this option, removing the normal feats of TWF, Imp TWF, Gtr TWF (somewhat modified from elsewhere, I forget the original). I do like your other
Two-Weapon Fighting [General]
Prerequisite: Dex 15
Benefit: You suffer no penalty for doing things with your off-hand. When you make an attack or full-attack action, you may make a number of attacks with your off-hand weapon equal to the number of attacks you are afforded with your primary weapon, at the same attack bonus.
You know, I wish we could use this one, but there are a few problems.
1. It would not be worth the feat unless your a rogue, again.
2. It would just give power to the rogue because of this.
3. Sense it is (#1) it would defeat the purpose of fixing two weapon fighting. Some times to make things worth while, it is just not that simple if your going to work within a system, but I wish it was; however if you notice, I did keep it as close to complexity as the original two weapon fighting.
IF the rogue had the BAB of the fighter, access to the weapon specialization/greater focus et al bunch, and did not depend on setting up sneak attacks for damage output, I would be more inclined to agree.
However, rogues do not generally deal as much damage, both from hitting less often as well as from having far less of an emphasis on raw damage power - and unless I have misinterpreted DR, if the basic weapon damage does not penetrate, the sneak attack damage amounts to precisely zero. Rogues generally have to spend actions to set up their sneak attacks barring Greater Invisibility spells, and even then there are going to be times when foes can easily perceive the rogue even when so concealed. Blindsight, tremorsense, See Invisibility, True Seeing and Uncanny Dodge/Improved Uncanny Dodge are all pretty sovereign defenses against being sneak attacked. A rogue is then reduced to maneuvering to flank or move-action-feint/standard-action-sneak attack against such foes. Many players forget to ensure that their rogues can even Feint in Combat I've seen.
Rogues' sneak attack is nasty - but they do not have the BAB progression to get more than six dual-weapon attacks at most (when they hit a BAB of 11/6/1), the last two of which are not going to be reliably connecting at all, with the above feat, against many typical foes.
My TWF feat gives more than yours, and requires less (only Dex 15, like the core TWF, instead of your proposed 17 Dex, 13 Str).
It certainly retains use for non-rogues, because if you note my text, it will apply to ALL attacks. This includes AoOs, charges, etc.
As for rogues, they retain the hitting problem in comparison to fighters, not as many attacks, and their only real source of damage is sneak attack. I've never considered the rogue some kind of god when they got to flank; especially now that 3.P is removing important sources of flat-footed conditions (nerfed blink and grease).
If the purpose is to "fix" non-rogue TWF'ers (something I think is beyond the ability of Paizo, to be honest, without *alot* of new feats that only the fighter, ranger, and barbarian can use) within the frame as you have placed it so far, why not just add class abilities to the classes you are trying to repair that gives them a +1 or 2 bonus when wielding two non-shield weapons?
Barbs don't really need it.. but for rangers it could be tacked onto the twf choice (they still have that, right?.. i've not even checked.. oi!)
For fighters, it could be a core ability given at level 1.. "dual wielding penalties are reduced by (x)" or "when dual wielding the fighter receives a bonus of (x) to attack rolls)
or whatnot?
-S
My TWF feat gives more than yours, and requires less (only Dex 15, like the core TWF, instead of your proposed 17 Dex, 13 Str).
It certainly retains use for non-rogues, because if you note my text, it will apply to ALL attacks. This includes AoOs, charges, etc.
As for rogues, they retain the hitting problem in comparison to fighters, not as many attacks, and their only real source of damage is sneak attack. I've never considered the rogue some kind of god when they got to flank; especially now that 3.P is removing important sources of flat-footed conditions (nerfed blink and grease).
I have edited it a lot sense the Original post, made a lost of mistakes and neglected to make some things clear.
Please check my latest post of my edited rules. On my PC this is Friday, 12:25 PM
P.S. I will be posting another edited version shortly as well.
If the purpose is to "fix" non-rogue TWF'ers (something I think is beyond the ability of Paizo, to be honest, without *alot* of new feats that only the fighter, ranger, and barbarian can use) within the frame as you have placed it so far, why not just add class abilities to the classes you are trying to repair that gives them a +1 or 2 bonus when wielding two non-shield weapons?
Barbs don't really need it.. but for rangers it could be tacked onto the twf choice (they still have that, right?.. i've not even checked.. oi!)
For fighters, it could be a core ability given at level 1.. "dual wielding penalties are reduced by (x)" or "when dual wielding the fighter receives a bonus of (x) to attack rolls)
or whatnot?
-S
I disagree with you on all terms really. For the purpose of K.I.S.S. and amount of text it would require it is simple that this slight re-working of TWF is simpler, and easier to understand. With your way, we would be talking about adding a paragraph at the LEAST to EVERY class in the game and every class to come, casters included, to be far.
Making feats specific for classes is useless and defeats the entire purpose of the fix. After spending 1 feat into TWF you should be to par, but not the same, as two handed weapon fighting.
I think saying that barbs don't need it is overly typecasting them due to 3e and their god like damage capabilities with two handed weapons. Anyway, barbarians need more variety as is.
I am not the final say in this as Jason always does, so if he thinks that the rogue does not deserve to be brought down for attempting sneak attacks, then that is his decision. No offense, but you might want to to start making arguments as to why this should be rather than just saying you don't like it and making up overly completed solutions.
IF the rogue had the BAB of the fighter, access to the weapon specialization/greater focus et al bunch, and did not depend on setting up sneak attacks for damage output, I would be more inclined to agree.
However, rogues do not generally deal as much damage, both from hitting less often as well as from having far less of an emphasis on raw damage power - and unless I have misinterpreted DR, if the basic weapon damage does not penetrate, the sneak attack damage amounts to precisely zero. Rogues generally have to spend actions to set up their sneak attacks barring Greater Invisibility spells, and even then there are going to be times when foes can easily perceive the rogue even when so concealed. Blindsight, tremorsense, See Invisibility, True Seeing and Uncanny Dodge/Improved Uncanny Dodge are all pretty sovereign defenses against being sneak attacked. A rogue is then reduced to maneuvering to flank or move-action-feint/standard-action-sneak attack against such foes. Many players forget to ensure that their rogues can even Feint in Combat I've seen.
Rogues' sneak attack is nasty - but they do not have the BAB progression to get more than six dual-weapon attacks at most (when they hit a BAB of 11/6/1), the last two of which are not going to be reliably connecting at all, with the above feat, against many typical foes.
Those are good points now. If Jason does not acknowledge this thread, I will make notes of these reason to strike the -3 to hit from performing sneak attack with two weapon fighting when the feat section comes up. I will just leave this up to him on this one, but purpose this variant as well as giving them an additional +1 to hit from the current bonuses for being trained.
Page 251
Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –4 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –5 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can eliminate these penalties with the Two-Weapon Fighting feat. If you have the two weapon fighting feat you may make as many attacks with your primary hand as your off hand gained from the increase in base attack. If your off-hand weapon is light, you gain a bonus of 1 to each attack, primary hand and off hand. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Table 9–7 summarizes the interaction of all these factors.
If you try to perform an attack that would deal precision damage you will take a -2 penalty to hit with both attacks. You must declare before the attack is made whether or not you are trying to perform an attack to deal precision damage. Normally you may only perform precision damage with your primary hand.
Table 9–7: Two-Weapon Fighting Penalties
Circumstances Primary Hand Off Hand
Normal effects –4 –5
Off-hand weapon is light –3 –4
Two-Weapon Fighting feat +0 +0
Off-hand weapon is light and +1 +1
Feats
Two-Weapon Fighting (Combat)
You can fight with a weapon in each hand. You can make
one extra attack each round with the second weapon.
Prerequisite: Dex 13 and Str 13, or 15 Dex
Benefit: Your penalties on attack rolls for fighting with two weapons are reduced. The penalty for two weapon fighting are eliminated. Performing one attack with your primary with one attack from your offhand weapon is now a single attack action. See Two-Weapon Fighting in Chapter 9.
Well, count me to be against your rewrite of the feat. Your "if you are a rogue you get extra penalties" bit just turns me off.
I am tired of repeating it however and you seem wedded to it, so I'll stop with the broken record routine and leave you to it :)
Good luck
-S
Well, count me to be against your rewrite of the feat. Your "if you are a rogue you get extra penalties" bit just turns me off.
I am tired of repeating it however and you seem wedded to it, so I'll stop with the broken record routine and leave you to it :)
Good luck
-S
You keep thinking I am all against rogues, but it is not that I am against them in the slightly. I am merely dealing with the fact that the feat was gimped for the lone effects of sneak attack alone. This effect was not meant for rogues only, but also the other similar classes like scout and ninja. Sigh. There was a reason for the huge minuses to hit in DnD 3.5, and this should be respected as there was probably a good reason for it, so to keep things far to the other classes I came up with a way to keep the minuses where it is was suspected to be. Now if Jason re-examines this and thinks that these minuses aren't needed, then fine.
P.S. I mean, really, other than "I don't like them getting singled out." comment would be nice. Did I miss something? What reasons do you have that they SHOULDN'T be singled out? Yes it does cost 1 more feat, but being able to charge and get off two sneak attacks in a surprise round or jumping out of a hidden spot seems quite powerful and alone is worth more than the 1 feat.
Last edit before feat section comes out.
__________________________________
Page 251
Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –4 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –5 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can eliminate these penalties with the Two-Weapon Fighting feat. If you have the two weapon fighting feat you may make as many attacks with your primary hand as your off hand gained from the increase in base attack. If your off-hand weapon is light, you gain a bonus of +1 to each attack, primary hand and off hand. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Table 9–7 summarizes the interaction of all these factors.
If you try to perform an attack that would deal precision damage while using two weapon fighting you need to take a -3 penalty to hit to that attack. You must declare before the attack is made whether or not you are trying to perform an attack that deals precision damage. Normally, you may only deal precision damage with your primary hand.
IF the rogue had the BAB of the fighter, access to the weapon specialization/greater focus et al bunch, and did not depend on setting up sneak attacks for damage output, I would be more inclined to agree.
However, rogues do not generally deal as much damage, both from hitting less often as well as from having far less of an emphasis on raw damage power - and unless I have misinterpreted DR, if the basic weapon damage does not penetrate, the sneak attack damage amounts to precisely zero. Rogues generally have to spend actions to set up their sneak attacks barring Greater Invisibility spells, and even then there are going to be times when foes can easily perceive the rogue even when so concealed. Blindsight, tremorsense, See Invisibility, True Seeing and Uncanny Dodge/Improved Uncanny Dodge are all pretty sovereign defenses against being sneak attacked. A rogue is then reduced to maneuvering to flank or move-action-feint/standard-action-sneak attack against such foes. Many players forget to ensure that their rogues can even Feint in Combat I've seen.
Rogues' sneak attack is nasty - but they do not have the BAB progression to get more than six dual-weapon attacks at most (when they hit a BAB of 11/6/1), the last two of which are not going to be reliably connecting at all, with the above feat, against many typical foes.
Table 9–7: Two-Weapon Fighting Penalties
Circumstances Primary Hand Off Hand
Normal effects –4 –5
Off-hand weapon is light –3 –4
Two-Weapon Fighting feat +0 +0
Off-hand weapon is light and +1 +1
Feats
Two-Weapon Fighting (Combat)
You can fight with a weapon in each hand. You can make one extra attack each round with the second weapon.
Prerequisite: Dex 13 and Str 13, or 15 Dex
Benefit: Your penalties for two weapon fighting are eliminated. Performing one attack with your primary and with one attack from your offhand weapon is now a single attack action. See Two-Weapon Fighting in Chapter 9.
______________________
Extra Precision Attack (Combat)
You can deal extra precision attacks with two weapon fighting
Prerequisite: Dex 17, Two Weapon Fighting Feat
Benefit: You may now perform one attack that deals precision damage with your offhand attack gained fro two weapon fighting.
Improved Extra Precision Attack (Combat)
You can deal can perform precision attacks with two weapon fighting.
Benefit: You may now perform two additional attacks with precision with your offhand attack gained fro two weapon fighting.
Superior Extra Precision Attack (Combat)
You can deal extra precision attacks with two weapon fighting
Prerequisite: Dex 19, Base Attack +11, Improved Extra Precision Attack
Benefit: You may now perform as many additional precision damage dealing attacks with your primary hand as your off hand.
End Results
Two Weapon fighting can be used identical to two handed weapon in ever way except for the listed below in damage an bonus to hit.
So in comparison between Two Handed Weapon Fighting, and Two Weapon Fighting:
Two Handed Weapon Fighting
Using maximum 1st level Stats
After 1 feat purchase
Weapon: Great Sword
Feat: Overhand Chop
Damage: 2D6+10
Range: 12- 22
Average: 17
To Hit: +0 differance
Two Weapon Fighting
Using maximum 1st level Stats
After 1 feat purchase
Weapon: 2 Long Swords
Feat: Two Weapon Fighting
Damage: 2D8+7
Range: 9- 23
Average: 16
To Hit: +0
Weapon: Long Sword + Short Sword
Feat: Two Weapon Fighting
Damage: 1D8+1D6+7
Range: 9 - 21
Average: 15
To Hit: +1
Improved Two Weapon Fighting
You learn to perform multiple attacks with greater efficiency
Prerequisite: Base Attack +6, Two Weapon Feat
Benefit: While wielding two weapons in melee you gain a +2 on all attacks gained from the improvement of base attack bonus to both primary and off hand attacks. This bonus does not apply to their initial two attacks at the highest base attack bonus.
Example: When a fighter gets a base attack bonus of 6 he has a bonus of +3 on his second attack instead of only +1. When they reach +11, the second round of attack will be +8, and third would be +3 to hit, and so on.
Greater Two Weapon Fighting
You learn to perform multiple attacks with greater efficiency
Prerequisite: Base Attack +11, Improved Two Weapon Feat
Benefit: While wielding two weapons in melee you gain an additional +1 on all attacks gained from the improvement of base attack bonus to both primary and off hand attacks. This bonus does not apply to their initial two attacks at the highest base attack bonus.
Example: When a fighter gets a base attack bonus of 6 he has a bonus of +4 on his second attack instead of only +3. When they reach +11, the second round of attack will be +9, and third would be +4 to hit, instead of the second attack being +8 and the third being +3.
Superior Two Weapon Fighting
You learn to perform multiple attacks with greater efficiency
Prerequisite: Base Attack +16, Greater Two Weapon Feat
Benefit: You gain a +1 bonus to all attacks while using two weapons to attack.
Two Weapon Trickster
Using two weapons you find better ways to perform specific combat maneuvers.
Prerequisite: Base Attack +5, Two Weapon Fighting, and any improved bonus feat for a combat maneuver that takes an attack action (Improved Disarm, Improved Sunder, Improved Grapple, or Improved Trip).
Benefit: While attempting a combat maneuvers with two melee weapons, you gain a +2 on each attempt you make so long as you have the improved feat coinciding with that the maneuver. This however does not work with a shield. This bonus increases by +1 for every additional attack past the first that you gained from two weapon fighting.
Special: You can not take this feat multiple times to have it apply to a separate combat maneuver. If have more than one improved combat maneuver listed in the requirements, or you later obtain one of those feats, the effects of this feat applies automatically. Both weapons must be considered unarmed, or a weapon that allows you to use it to perform a grapple, to us the grapple combat maneuver to gain a bonus from this feat.
Two Weapon Focus Mastery (Idea from Kirth Gersen)
You knowledge in fighting with one weapon has been expanded to work with a different weapon at the same time.
Prerequisite: Two Weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus
Benefit: You chose a select weapon type to as a focused off hand weapon. While using two weapons with the two weapon fighting feat with this select weapon you gain the effects of the weapon focus and weapons specialization feats, as well as their improved versions to that select weapon type. This only works while both weapons are being used in two weapon fighting, and while in melee. Also, so long as the off hand weapon is light and the primary hand weapon is one handed they gain an additional +1 to hit to both primary and off hand attacks, as they are even harder to predict and defend against.
Example: A fighter has weapon specialization in a bastard sword. He takes this feat and chooses a dagger as his secondary weapon. While using this pair of weapons he may apply the weapon focus and the weapon specialization meant only for the bastard sword to the dagger.
Special: This feat does work with shields
Shield Trickster
Using a shield you find better ways to perform specific combat maneuvers by optimizing on the cover and protection a shield grants.
Prerequisite: Base Attack +5, Improved Shield Bash, and ether Improved Bull Rush, Improved Overrun, or Improved Disarm.
Benefit: While attempting a combat maneuvers with a shield, but not a buckler, you gain a +2 on each attempt you make to bull rush, overrun, disarm or grapple check. This works with a shield being used only. This bonus increases by +1 for every attack past the first that you gained from an increasing base attack bonus you have.
This is to help give shields their own style as well. I have seen a lot of nice feats for shields already, such as granting cover or AC/cover to others. This was made to mirror the Two Weapon Trickster feat, giving them their own preferred maneuvers.