I'm sure somebody has posted something similar in another thread, but I just had some ideas for updating the Dervish Dance feat (found in the new Inner Sea Guide).
I wasn't the most pleased with the reduction in damage that the Pathfinder rules gave the scimitar, but the increase in crit range is nice. A fair compromise. However, the fact that the scimitar is considered a 1-handed weapon and suffers big penalites when dual-wielding was a bit much. I mean, almost every other melee weapon that does 1d6 damage or less is a light weapon. To fix this, we have to turn to feats (printed or custom).
The Dervish Dance feat was almost perfect in solving this dilemma. It allowed the wielder of the scimitar to not only use his dex bonus to hit, but also to damage. Wonderful! However, you could only use one scimitar, and the other hand had to either be empty or be carrying anything but a weapon.
With the rules posted as they are, major NPCs such as the famous Drizzt Do'Urden would be rendered almost completely useless. So, some house rules seem in order.
I propose modifying Dervish Dance to the following:
Prerequisites: Dex 15, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (Scimitar), and Perform (Dance) 2 Ranks.
Benefit: As written, but the wielder may use a scimitar in his off-hand, and that scimitar is treated as a light weapon for dual-wielding purposes.
What does everyone think?
|
What does everyone think?
Broken. Enjoy your Drizz't clones.
The scimitar is already one of the best one-handed martial weapons. The threat range is much more important than the damage die of the weapon. Unless they are going for the falcata, most fighters will chose either scimitar or falchion, depending on their fighting styles. TWFs usually use kukris. There is no need to strengthen those weapon, they are already an excellent choice.
|
What does everyone think?Broken. Enjoy your Drizz't clones.
The scimitar is already one of the best one-handed martial weapons. The threat range is much more important than the damage die of the weapon. Unless they are going for the falcata, most fighters will chose either scimitar or falchion, depending on their fighting styles. TWFs usually use kukris. There is no need to strengthen those weapon, they are already an excellent choice.
+1
I actually wanted to add something constructive in my post, but you've said it all already.
Dervish Dance itself is already a really good feat, there's no sense in pumping it up.
With the rules posted as they are, major NPCs such as the famous Drizzt Do'Urden would be rendered almost completely useless. So, some house rules seem in order.
Why not just build Drizzt as a STR ranger?
Broken.
+1
You know, my first reaction was to agree about it being broken, but the more I looked into the mechanics and compared the relative worth in combat, the more I will have to disagree. Here's why:
When D&D first came out, it was almost pointless to take ranged weapons. They only did one die of damage and that was only modified by magical means, you didn't even get a Str bonus.
When 3.0 came out, or sometime around then, you could purchase increased Str bonuses for bows, but they were costly, and the benefits still didn't stack up.
It wasn't until the recent Pathfinder (version 3.75) came out that archers were able to hold their own, finally. Deadly Aim and all the other new ranged combat feats suddenly made ranged combat an equal aspect to melee. (And there was much rejoicing....yayyy)
But now, it seems that two-weapon fighting has fallen behind, requiring many more feats to become good at, while not producing nearly as great results.
As an example, I'll compare two fighters, one a 2-handed fighter (2H) and one a 2-weapon fighter (2W). Let's assume that both fighters are 4th level, human, have 18 in their prime stat (Str for 2H and Dex for 2W) and 14 in all others. Let's also assume that they each have weapon focus and weapon specialization in their weapon of choice. 2H has power attack and 2W has two-weapon fighting and weapon finesse (already one feat choice more than 2H). Let's also assume that both fighters' weapons are masterwork.
2H chooses the greatsword as his weapon of choice. He uses power attack and has an attack bonus of + 8 and does 2d6 + 14 damage (21 average).
2W chooses the shortsword as his weapon of choice (to maximize his feat bonuses and limit his penalties, since he wields two weapons). He has an attack bonus of + 8/ + 8 and does 1d6 + 4/1d6 + 3 damage (14 average). 2W not only does an average of 7 points less with a full attack, but has had to spend one extra feat slot.
Let's introduce the Dervish Dance feat above, with my modifications.
2W now chooses the scimitar as his weapon of choice. He has an attack bonus of + 8/ + 8 and does 1d6 + 6/1d6 + 4 damage (17 average). He still doesn't do as much damage, and is now down by TWO feat choices.
As you can see, 2-weapon combat as written is what is truly broken, not the introduction of rules that help even things out.
Pathfinder took some great steps forward in evening out ranged combat. Now they just need to even out 2-weapon combat.
|
|
Nearly any combat oriented class has some bonus damage that is applied to a weapon, no matter if it's one-handed, two-handed or off-hand. Also, scimitars should not be compared to greatswords but to falchions or curveblades. Yes, a character with improved dervish dance would need three feats. How many feats does it take a strength based character to get strength on initiative, AC, reflex saves and skill checks?
Getting dexterity on damage is extremely powerful. Dervish Dance is fine because it has some rather severe limitations (that are less severe for a magus). Not only does Improved Dervish Dance remove this restrictions, it also makes the scimitar the best martial light weapon in the game.
As has been pointed out, your suggestion is broken.
Also, you neglected to point out that your improved dervish dancer at level 4, using power attack, gets: +6/+6 (1d6 + 8) damage
Also you neglected to point out the average expected damage against a CR appropriate (say CR 4) foe (AC 17):
2Hander: 0.6 * 21 * 1.1 = 13.86
2W, scimitars: 2 * 0.6 * 9.5 * 1.15 = 13.11
2W, scimitars, with power attack: 2 * 0.5 * 13.5 * 1.15 = 15.525
Improved dervish dance outstrips the 2hander easily. Keen scimitars (compared to keen greatswords) will exasperate this even more.
Nearly any combat oriented class has some bonus damage that is applied to a weapon, no matter if it's one-handed, two-handed or off-hand. Also, scimitars should not be compared to greatswords but to falchions or curveblades. Yes, a character with improved dervish dance would need three feats. How many feats does it take a strength based character to get strength on initiative, AC, reflex saves and skill checks?
Getting dexterity on damage is extremely powerful. Dervish Dance is fine because it has some rather severe limitations (that are less severe for a magus). Not only does Improved Dervish Dance remove this restrictions, it also makes the scimitar the best martial light weapon in the game.
Again, whether or not the feat makes a weapon more useful is irrelevant when compared to the impact it has on the game as a whole. I wasn't comparing a scimitar to a greatsword, only that 2-weapon combat doesn't stack up to 2-handed combat.
As the rules are written, there is almost no point to EVER playing a 2-weapon fighter. In fact, you could remove the light weapon restriction to finesse (allowing it to be used for any 1-handed weapon), and also apply dex for damage instead of strength with finesse for all weapons, and it still wouldn't exactly match up, but it would then be close. You would still have to spend the extra feat for finesse. Plus, with a standard attack (cleave, vital strike, etc), the 2-handed fighter will still be head and shoulders above a 2-weapon fighter.
I wasn't comparing a scimitar to a greatsword, only that 2-weapon combat doesn't stack up to 2-handed combat.
Check my post above to see why the academic community frowns on your conclusion.
at OP.
I am willing to prove that 2H wp is not better than dual wielding. Name any level between 1 and 12 (thats where everything counts), and make a 2 H fighter with a 20 point buy and standard WBL, just like if you were planning to play him. Then i will make a fighter using 2 weapons with the existing rules, and the average damage if you remember to include the chance to hit an opponent, will be almost the same.
If i make it using your suggested houserule, then i will absolutely rip that 2 h fighter to pieces.
As has been pointed out, your suggestion is broken.
Also, you neglected to point out that your improved dervish dancer at level 4, using power attack, gets: +6/+6 (1d6 + 8) damage
That is incorrect. The 2W fighter did not have power attack in the example. If he did, that would be yet ANOTHER feat down, plus it would lower his attack to + 6/ + 6 and his damage to 1d6 + 10/1d6 + 6.
Plus, you have to figure that the 2W fighter has to hit with both attacks on a full attack action to come close to the 2H fighter. Increase the level to 6th with the same stats and abilities, and then have each fighter perform a full attack.
2H gets 2 attacks at + 10 and + 5, and does 2d6 + 14 on each (total average damage 42 points).
2W gets 3 attacks at + 10, + 10, and + 5, and does 1d6 + 6/1d6 + 4/1d6 + 6 (total average damage 26 points).
EDIT: What would be the mathematical formula for these attacks?
|
|
THF benefits from extra attack (like haste or Dawnflower Dervish), TWF benefits from bonus damage. TWF also has a much greater chance of landing critical hits which is pretty useful for a high level fighter. There are several ways to move and gain a full attack. Fighters can do it, Barbarians can do it, Rangers and Cavaliers can do it. The magus can do it, too, but a TWF magus is incredibly cheesy.
Two weapon fighting is quite powerful if you know how to use it.
THF benefits from extra attack (like haste or Dawnflower Dervish), TWF benefits from bonus damage. TWF also has a much greater chance of landing critical hits which is pretty useful for a high level fighter. There are several ways to move and gain a full attack. Fighters can do it, Barbarians can do it, Rangers and Cavaliers can do it. The magus can do it, too, but a TWF magus is incredibly cheesy.
Two weapon fighting is quite powerful if you know how to use it.
I agree completely. Some of the new magus rules can blow this whole system out of the water. Also, I've seen other posts where rogues tend to skew the 2w results just as badly, if not more.
Sigh.
you guys do realise that the magus cant dualwield? or what kinda cheesyness have i missed?
and at OP, offer is still running, make a 2h build and lets compare DPR and general viability, pros and cons.
and a rogue cant outdamage a fighter, even of they both dualwield and they are flanking, alowing the rogue to sneak attack.
you guys do realise that the magus cant dualwield? or what kinda cheesyness have i missed?
LOL. One of the players in my group is playing with the new spellblade magus archetype. He uses a weapon in one hand (bastard sword) and a spell effect or arcana from the other. He quite often does his normal sword damage and deals an extra 2d6 energy damage. Quite a lot for a 4th level character.
i thought u guys meant real dual wielding, not with the spell effects. But im still open for any dual wielding character og 2 H wielding Fighter, to pit against a dual wielding fighter build.
|
|
For a two weapon fighter, I'd propose a Dawnflower Dervish. They don't get as many special abilities as the two weapon fighter archetype, but they get the ability to move and full attack which is huge. They also keep weapon training which allows them to use dueling gloves and is less restrictive than the ability the mobile fighter gets. They lose armor training, so they're going to use either a celestial armor or a mithral breastplate. The weapon of choice is the kukri since it has a nice threat range and is a light weapon. It only does 1d4, but that becomes less relevant pretty soon.
They are still strength based, because this way they get more damage and also gain much extra damage from Two Weapon Rend. They really get to shine at 11th level and later because at that point their mobility kicks in and they gain access to critical feats.
THF may still be stronger at low levels, but a feat like Improved Dervish Dance is not going to change that (considering it costs three feats in addition to TWF).
For a two weapon fighter, I'd propose a Dawnflower Dervish. They don't get as many special abilities as the two weapon fighter archetype, but they get the ability to move and full attack which is huge. They also keep weapon training which allows them to use dueling gloves and is less restrictive than the ability the mobile fighter gets. They lose armor training, so they're going to use either a celestial armor or a mithral breastplate. The weapon of choice is the kukri since it has a nice threat range and is a light weapon. It only does 1d4, but that becomes less relevant pretty soon.
They are still strength based, because this way they get more damage and also gain much extra damage from Two Weapon Rend. They really get to shine at 11th level and later because at that point their mobility kicks in and they gain access to critical feats.
THF may still be stronger at low levels, but a feat like Improved Dervish Dance is not going to change that (considering it costs three feats in addition to TWF).
Where can I find the stats for the Dawnflower Dervish? It definitely sounds like an interesting class.
|
|
Where can I find the stats for the Dawnflower Dervish? It definitely sounds like an interesting class.For a two weapon fighter, I'd propose a Dawnflower Dervish. They don't get as many special abilities as the two weapon fighter archetype, but they get the ability to move and full attack which is huge. They also keep weapon training which allows them to use dueling gloves and is less restrictive than the ability the mobile fighter gets. They lose armor training, so they're going to use either a celestial armor or a mithral breastplate. The weapon of choice is the kukri since it has a nice threat range and is a light weapon. It only does 1d4, but that becomes less relevant pretty soon.
They are still strength based, because this way they get more damage and also gain much extra damage from Two Weapon Rend. They really get to shine at 11th level and later because at that point their mobility kicks in and they gain access to critical feats.
THF may still be stronger at low levels, but a feat like Improved Dervish Dance is not going to change that (considering it costs three feats in addition to TWF).
Inner Sea Primer. Also here.
Inner Sea Primer. Also here.
First off, I want to say "Thank You" to everyone who has posted here so far. The input, and more importantly, the intelligent and articulated input, has been very constructive and insightful. You've all given me a wonderful array of opposed opinions, and much to think about.
As has been pointed out, your suggestion is broken.
Also, you neglected to point out that your improved dervish dancer at level 4, using power attack, gets: +6/+6 (1d6 + 8) damage
That is incorrect. The 2W fighter did not have power attack in the example. If he did, that would be yet ANOTHER feat down, plus it would lower his attack to + 6/ + 6 and his damage to 1d6 + 10/1d6 + 6.
Plus, you have to figure that the 2W fighter has to hit with both attacks on a full attack action to come close to the 2H fighter. Increase the level to 6th with the same stats and abilities, and then have each fighter perform a full attack.
2H gets 2 attacks at + 10 and + 5, and does 2d6 + 14 on each (total average damage 42 points).
2W gets 3 attacks at + 10, + 10, and + 5, and does 1d6 + 6/1d6 + 4/1d6 + 6 (total average damage 26 points).
EDIT: What would be the mathematical formula for these attacks?
The number of feats used by a dual-wielding fighter is irrelevant. Two-weapon fighting is a feat-heavy endeavour; how many feats you need to get it to work is just how it goes. At level 6 the 2W would take improved two-weapon fighting. Using your numbers, and the improved feat (which I think are wrong, or should be compensated with the feat to make off-hand attacks take same "full" strength bonus):
Target AC for CR 6: 19
2H: +10/+5 (2d6+14): 0.6 * 21 * 1.1 + 0.35 * 21 * 1.1 = 21.945
2W: +10/+10/+5 (1d6 + 10 / 1d6 + 6): 0.6 * 13.5 * 1.15 + 0.6 * 9.5 * 1.15 + 0.35 * 13.5 * 1.15 = 21.30375
2W, with improved: +10/+10/+5/+5 (1d6 + 10 / 1d6 + 6):
0.6 * 13.5 * 1.15 + 0.6 * 9.5 * 1.15 + 0.35 * 13.5 * 1.15 + 0.35 * 9.5 * 1.15 = 25.1275
The academic community still frowns upon your conclusions. :p
Something that is not addressed in the example math is an effect that promotes the DPR of a 2W over a 2H: any "static" bonus to attack or damage (like flanking, bardsong, good hope, bless, etc) will cause the 2W DPR to go up more than the 2H - simply because the static bonuses are applied more times on any given attack.
So things like Weapon Specialization, and Weapon Training favor the 2W.
The one thing that acts against that is Haste, an extra attack favors the 2H. But not enough so given all the possible static bonuses.
The number of feats used by a dual-wielding fighter is irrelevant.
Actually, nothing could be more relevant, since one of the prime points I was making with this post was the fact that it DOES take quite a number of feats to do, and it really shouldn't (if classes and builds are supposed to remain relatively close). With those extra feats that a 2H fighter saves, he could improve his chances to score a critical hit, increase his AC, or any number of other things, many of which would increase his mathematical averages (skewing the "scientific community's" perception even further). :P It is relevant because the combat mechanics have provided an uneven playing field due primarily to the increased feat expenditure required to fight with two weapons - the whole reason for this post.
Regardless of whether you agree with using a scimitar in the off-hand as a light weapon or not, or using dex for damage, you do have to admit that a two-weapon fighter shouldn't have to spend so many feats to accomplish so little.
|
|
TWF fighters accomplish a lot. Also, there are about five TWF feats in the game. There's also Improved Shield Bash, but shield users aren't comparable to TWF fighters. Even with Two Weapon Fighting, Double Slice, Improved Two Weapon Fighting, Two Weapon Rend and Greater Two Weapon Fighting, a 12th level fighter still has eight feat slots left. Any fighter with armor training will benefit from having a high dexterity.
A high level TWF fighter will deal more damage on a full attack as even DR isn't really a problem at that point. THF will deal more damage on a standard action but there are several ways to make sure you get full attacks, unless you are staggered. And a TWF fighter is much better in staggering others.
Different fighters have different advantages:
Two-handed fighters - strong standard attacks
Archery fighter - high damage
Shield fighters - high defense
Two Weapon fighters - debuffs, either through combat maneuvers or through critical feats
Yes, it takes some feats to use TWF. But isn't that the point of the fighter?
Yes, it takes some feats to use TWF. But isn't that the point of the fighter?
Very true. I suppose since I really want to play a dervish-type character I'm just gonna have to suck it up and take the -4/-4 penalty (at least until Paizo puts out some new data). I'm waiting breathlessly for Ultimate Combat.
Regardless of whether you agree with using a scimitar in the off-hand as a light weapon or not, or using dex for damage, you do have to admit that a two-weapon fighter shouldn't have to spend so many feats to accomplish so little.
Not at all. The feat investment is completely fair in my opinion - 2W fighter ends up having the highest DPR (compared to 2H). I expect him to invest feats for that. And a fighter isn't short for feats. Additionally, there are considerably more options available for a 2W fighter, rend, two-weapon defense, and so forth - with few unique feats for a 2H fighter.
See, what you are complaining about is *difficulty* of achieving something. That is not a problem to me. The only thing relevant is whether it *can* be done.
|
|
Very true. I suppose since I really want to play a dervish-type character I'm just gonna have to suck it up and take the -4/-4 penalty (at least until Paizo puts out some new data). I'm waiting breathlessly for Ultimate Combat.
Yes, it takes some feats to use TWF. But isn't that the point of the fighter?
You may want to check out the APG. The two weapon fighter archetype gets reduced penalties for TWF with one-handed weapons. Or use kukris and describe them as light scimitars.
you guys do realise that the magus cant dualwield? or what kinda cheesyness have i missed?A magus can dualwield. With armor spikes. It's rather stupid. RAW a magus can even gain dexterity on armor spike damage while using dervish dance.
yes ofcourse he can dualwield like that. But besides being kinda cheesy, then the 2H fighter can do that too. Even the dual wielding fighter can use the armor spikes as a 3rd weapon. But now we begin to drift away from the "viable in combat" motive of the feat, and start comparing different kinds of stupid.
I also recommend that the op takes a look at the dual wp fighter from the APG. Besides getting to attack with both of his weapons as a standard attack, he also gets reduced penalty (to -2/-2) when fighting with 2 normal weapons. Definately worthwhile in my oppinion