If two-handing a weapon didn't give any extra bonuses, what would you make?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Two-handing a weapon wouldn't give you 1.5x your Strength mod and it wouldn't give you extra damage when power attacking. Or any other benefit.

What fighting styles would you use? Why?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sword and board.

Silver Crusade

Depends.

Ultimately, I want the following:

Big static damage
High crit range
Lots of Attacks

Dual Wielding Wakizashi fighter anyone?

Silver Crusade

Cheapy wrote:

Two-handing a weapon wouldn't give you 1.5x your Strength mod and it wouldn't give you extra damage when power attacking. Or any other benefit.

What fighting styles would you use? Why?

Archery: it's awesome anyway

TWF: its only crime is being more feat intensive than 2-handing
Natural Attacks: because I've always wanted to play a summoner without that pesky summoner guy


I'd carry a shield and a one-handed weapon.


DeathSpot wrote:

Sword and board.

Riuken wrote:
TWF: its only crime is being more feat intensive than 2-handing

But wait, there's more! For a limited time only, you can play a Shoanti warrior (any class...) using the Thunder and Fang feat to TWF with a TWO HANDED WEAPON and a shield. Still not convinced? What if we threw in keeping your AC bonus from the shield with which you were attacking? For free!

Oh, so I guess I'm saying I'd play a T&F TWFer.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

thunder and fang doesn't even require you to be a Shoanti. it merely requires you to pick up the fourth volume of curse of the crimson throne, and come up with a halfhearted excuse for why you got accepted into a Shoanti Quah.

Sczarni

Magus/Inquisitor. Leaving a hand free to cast spells suddenly lost a good bit of its drawback.


Cheapy wrote:

Two-handing a weapon wouldn't give you 1.5x your Strength mod and it wouldn't give you extra damage when power attacking. Or any other benefit.

What fighting styles would you use? Why?

Sword and Board. After I asked the GM why exactly was he punishing poeple for using a 2 hander, since doing so means that you are getting neither enhanced offense and nerfed defense.

But it would be sword & board all the way. Still has good, solid damage, the potential for smashing people for 3d6 or more shield damage, and you get some pretty hardcore armor class modifiers that makes you extremely difficult to hit at even high levels for most enemies (a heavy shield adds up to +7 AC, while a tower shield adds up to +9 AC, but heavy is less cumbersome).

A fighter without shield focus would have +15 armor (+5 full plate w/kilt), +7 shield (+5 heavy shield), +5 natural (amulet, spell, other), +5 deflection (ring, spell, other), +1 insight (ioun stone), and about +8 Dexterity. Totals about 51 before feats or buffs. Could easily break 60 if you invested a bit here and there. Crane Style and a few ranks in acrobatics could get you to 55 for a -2. Combat expertise would bring you to 61. You could still get another 3 out of feats.

Why? Because you basically killed 2 handers completely. You made them 1 handed weapons that take 2 hands to wield. :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:

Why?

Because I'm curious to see what people do when the thing they always do is taken away. In this case, it's two-handed weapons.

Dark Archive

Do people hate reach weapons that much? I'd probably still rock a two-hander. Shields are so unwieldy.


I'd have to go with a sword an board fighter. Cause shield are awesome when in a pinch just ask Perseus.


Mergy wrote:
Do people hate reach weapons that much? I'd probably still rock a two-hander. Shields are so unwieldy.

I was a bit perplexed that no one had mentioned reach weapons until you.


Cheapy wrote:
Ashiel wrote:

Why?

Because I'm curious to see what people do when the thing they always do is taken away. In this case, it's two-handed weapons.

Saying this as someone who just whipped the snot out of an equal level monk as a 10th level bard wielding a single short sword in a locked gauntlet; not everyone uses 2 handers exclusively. There are arguments that sword & board is even better in normal Pathfinder. Especially since for most PCs the high end of added strength damage is around +5 (a 30 strength is +15, vs +10 base).


Ashiel wrote:
Cheapy wrote:
Ashiel wrote:

Why?

Because I'm curious to see what people do when the thing they always do is taken away. In this case, it's two-handed weapons.
Saying this as someone who just whipped the snot out of an equal level monk as a 10th level bard wielding a single short sword in a locked gauntlet; not everyone uses 2 handers exclusively. There are arguments that sword & board is even better in normal Pathfinder. Especially since for most PCs the high end of added strength damage is around +5 (a 30 strength is +15, vs +10 base).

As I'm sure you're keenly aware, you're more often the exception ;)


the damage bonus from power attack also improves, so that 30 STR and 20 bab that go together grant +11. at most. most 10th level builds with 22 are rocking a more simple +6.


Riuken wrote:
Cheapy wrote:

Two-handing a weapon wouldn't give you 1.5x your Strength mod and it wouldn't give you extra damage when power attacking. Or any other benefit

TWF: its only crime is being more feat intensive than 2-handing

Ha! I make TWF Fighters/Rangers/Cavaliers and Paladins Anyway

:)

The feat investment sux, I know. But doubling Smite/FE/Challenge/Gtr Wpn Spec+Wpn Training+Gloves makes me smile!

Honestly the Most elegant thing to fix TWF would be to make DOUBLESLICE give a 1:2 PA bonus to the offhand as well.

Currently
2h PA= 1:3 attack penalty/damage bonus

TWF= 1:2 Primary and 1:1 offhand.

Which is my most people hate spending 3 feats just to get the extra attacks.
If Double slice Made it

TWF= 1:2 Primary and 1:2 offhand people would be happy.


Cheapy wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Cheapy wrote:
Ashiel wrote:

Why?

Because I'm curious to see what people do when the thing they always do is taken away. In this case, it's two-handed weapons.
Saying this as someone who just whipped the snot out of an equal level monk as a 10th level bard wielding a single short sword in a locked gauntlet; not everyone uses 2 handers exclusively. There are arguments that sword & board is even better in normal Pathfinder. Especially since for most PCs the high end of added strength damage is around +5 (a 30 strength is +15, vs +10 base).
As I'm sure you're keenly aware, you're more often the exception ;)

Am I? :P

Hm, I have seen lots of people go sword & board in my online games (and I always carry a few spare weapons so I can quick-swap to another weapon and shield from a 2 hander when I am using one, and I do love reach weapons) using weapons besides 2 handers. 2 handers are just the damage dealer's weapon of choice.

Dual-wielding is cool, but it suffers horribly because of a number of mechanical limitations (but my online campaign has taken steps to improve it as a more readily viable option for combat).

Of course, the games tend towards the tactical pretty regularly; so it's possible I have an appreciation for certain styles of combat in the game that are unusual to say the least. For example, stuff like total defense is used liberally in my games (if I need to close on a group of archers, I'll draw a shield as part of movement and then total defense as I approach, giving a nice +6 AC vs the missile weapons, which is pretty darn important when you've got a ton of enemies shooting at you).

Heh, I recently built a revised monk who was fighting another PC in an off-record sparring event for us to practice our tactics, and the PC realized that my monk had poopy accuracy at 1st level using a flurry, so decided to use a total defense. My monk ran up and without having Improved Grapple used a Grapple since you can't make AoOs during a total defense. Sure the +4 dodge applies to CMD as well, but it was easier to hit that PC's 10 + Str + Dex + 4 instead of trying to get through their 10 + Armor + Dex + 4. :P

Eh, maybe you're right. (^.^)"


I'd probably be somewhere else- in a campaign without arbitrary house rules.

But in the spirit of the topic- sword and board probably.
All you would really do is change "I want to do high damage as a melee so I'll use a 2 handed weapon" to "i want to do high damage and since the DM neutered what I want to do I'll do decent damage and might as well wield a shield too since my otherhand will just be flailing around anyway and I can twf with it and get the shield bonus too with a feat".

Possibly straight up dual wield.. but I'd probably go for the shield just to have the AC bonus while I still did decent damage instead of giving up AC for damage as the 2hander build typically does.

-S


Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
the damage bonus from power attack also improves, so that 30 STR and 20 bab that go together grant +11. at most. most 10th level builds with 22 are rocking a more simple +6.

It's worth noting that your damage will fall pretty heavily using PA vs an enemy with a decent AC. For example, at 10th level with a 22 Strength, you get +9 damage from Str vs +6. You get +9 damage from Power Attack vs +6, but you take a -15% hit from Power Attack.

A quick breakdown. BAB 10, Str +6, Weapon +2, PA -3 = +15 to hit. Not counting additional feats.

AC might include 10 base, +12 armor (+2 full plate w/ kilt), +5 shield, and +3 Dex, AC 30.

Now without the shield your AC is only 25.

The guy with the two hander has about a 25% chance of hitting the guy with the shield, so his DPR is roughly (let's say a greatsword) 2d6+20 * .25 = 6.75 per round.

The guy with a longsword and not using Power Attack is dealing 1d8+8, but hits him 70% of the time for 8.75 damage per round. The guy with the longsword and shield is kicking the snot out of the guy with the greatsword. Now since the guy with the greatsword has no shield, the guy with the longsword could take the -3 to hit and add +6 to damage, changing his to hit chances from 70% to 55% and his DPR to 10.175.


full plate has a max dex of +1, unless you are talking about mithril fullplate or have armor training of 2 or better.

mithril is expensive. especially for heavy armor.

also, the Armored kilt has no effect on heavy armor.

and where did these characters get the funds for such expensive defensive gear?


Personally I prefer sword and board to the Two handed fighter. I found I can out damage a TWo Handed fighter because I get twice the attacks. I'm doing 2D8 + 2x Str per 2D6 + 1.5 x Str. Sure a power attack at level 12 is +12 damage for the two handed weapon but at 3 attack that 36. For me 8 x 6 attack for 48. I take -2 on my sword to hit. All this assuming I can hit.


Well, if I could get one of those old 3.5 reach-and-melee weapons, I might use that.

But most likely I'd just use a shield, I really like the Captain America fighting style, and I'm just not that big on two-weapon fighting anymore.

I'm not sure if that is the result of TWF rules being so prohibitive, losing interest in the theme because I can't think of a really interesting TWF character, or because I just don't do fighters that much anymore.

Sczarni

I'm surprised nobody else has suggested a Magus or other Gish build. Is the Dervish Dance Shocking Grasp Scimitar not what it used to be?

But now that Mergy mentions reach weapons, I have wanted to try out the Dorn-Dergar or the Kusarigama...


Shuriken Nekogami wrote:

full plate has a max dex of +1, unless you are talking about mithril fullplate or have armor training of 2 or better.

mithril is expensive. especially for heavy armor.

also, the Armored kilt has no effect on heavy armor.

and where did these characters get the funds for such expensive defensive gear?

It doesn't make it heavier.

As for funding, the average gp for a 10th level character is 62,000 gp.

+2 armor is 4,000 gp plus cost of armor.
+3 shield is 9,000 gp plus cost of shield.
+2 weapon is 8,000 gp plus cost of weapon.

Cheapsauce.

An even more honest comparison would have also included a +1 ring of protection (2,000 gp), +1 amulet of natural armor (2,000 gp), and possibly a +1 insight from a 5,000 gp ioun stone; bringing AC to 33 with a shield or 27 without.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Dual-wielder with feats to use the off-hand for defense.

I am the bone of my sword...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Cheapy wrote:
Ashiel wrote:

Why?

Because I'm curious to see what people do when the thing they always do is taken away. In this case, it's two-handed weapons.

I have this change already in my home games and players are still using Two-handed weapons. The damage dice is still high enough that its worth it. This includes removing Power Attacks +50% for when using two-handed weapons.

So far it does seem to have a nice balance versus the one player using a Longsword and Shield. The players with the Greatsword and Falchion are still one-shot killing things with 18-20 Str characters at levels 1-3.

I am thinking of giving the bonus back at level 6 but I am waiting for more play test to see if its really needed. So overall it didn't change many players builds except to make the one-handed characters to be a little more inline with lower level damage output.


Cheapy wrote:

Two-handing a weapon wouldn't give you 1.5x your Strength mod and it wouldn't give you extra damage when power attacking. Or any other benefit.

What fighting styles would you use? Why?

archery.


I'm not a huge fan of 2handed weapons anyway, the concept has to match the fighting style so I may use a 2H weapon for a brute but more than likely I use either sword/shield or 2 weapons.

Sometimes the build is based off of the picture I use to represent my character so I build using the weapons shown in the picture.


Ashiel wrote:
Shuriken Nekogami wrote:

full plate has a max dex of +1, unless you are talking about mithril fullplate or have armor training of 2 or better.

mithril is expensive. especially for heavy armor.

also, the Armored kilt has no effect on heavy armor.

and where did these characters get the funds for such expensive defensive gear?

It doesn't make it heavier.

As for funding, the average gp for a 10th level character is 62,000 gp.

+2 armor is 4,000 gp plus cost of armor.
+3 shield is 9,000 gp plus cost of shield.
+2 weapon is 8,000 gp plus cost of weapon.

Cheapsauce.

An even more honest comparison would have also included a +1 ring of protection (2,000 gp), +1 amulet of natural armor (2,000 gp), and possibly a +1 insight from a 5,000 gp ioun stone; bringing AC to 33 with a shield or 27 without.

yeah, if you happen to start 10th and pick your gear Ala carte. not everyone has that privilege.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd 2-hand a reach weapon. Or make a specialized archer.

But this rule would basically neuter a lot of builds.

ShadowChemosh wrote:

I have this change already in my home games and players are still using Two-handed weapons. The damage dice is still high enough that its worth it. This includes removing Power Attacks +50% for when using two-handed weapons.

So far it does seem to have a nice balance versus the one player using a Longsword and Shield. The players with the Greatsword and Falchion are still one-shot killing things with 18-20 Str characters at levels 1-3.

I am thinking of giving the bonus back at level 6 but I am waiting for more play test to see if its really needed. So overall it didn't change many players builds except to make the one-handed characters to be a little more inline with lower level damage output.

So instead of buffing TWFers and Duelists, you nerf the one martial melee build who doesn't need 4~6 feats to work? Why?

Personally, I prefer to buff other character to achieve the same viability as a 2Her. For instance, Improved TWF, Greater TWF and Double Slice were all fused in a single feat. Improved/Greater Combat Maneuver feats were also condensed into one for each maneuver, and they no longer require Combat Expertise or Int 13. Dueling has its own feat chain, one to add 1x5x Dex modifier to AC (still limited by armor), and another one to add Int to damage.

Improving other combat styles is, IMO, a much better way to balance the game. Martials struggle enough as it is, they don't need any nerfs.


That thinking leads to power creep and is generally why rogues suck now.

Yet I still agree with you...hmm, paradoxical.


boring7 wrote:

That thinking leads to power creep and is generally why rogues suck now.

Yet I still agree with you...hmm, paradoxical.

I believe the trick is knowing to stop before it overcompensates and tips the balance the other way. I've yet to see any martial character steal a caster's thunder because of my house rules.

Rogues could be a lot better if they had more cool abilities. Instead of nerfing everyone so they can compete, why not make rogue talents that are actually useful? Or feats that benefit rogues. Something like they causing bleed damage or whatever. Maybe some cool (and useful) scaling feats with trapfinding and/or sneak attack as a pre-requisite.

Even a whole "Ultimate Subterfuge" book. Focused mostly on rogues, ninjas, bards and rangers, with a few options for other classes too.

Dark Archive

Ashiel why does the 2 handed guy get 9k gold less than the shield guy? One would assume he would at least have a +3 armor considering he decided not to use a shield?

However it all depends on the character and build as to what I would do if I didnt get bonuses from 2handing, I would switch to a reach weapon of some sort as I need a hand free for casting sometimes


Magic, bow or maybe a Dervish Dance Magus, because not being able to do noteworthy damage sucks.

If everything got 1.5 strength mod and full power attack damage regardless of number of hands, I think I'd fool around with some more exotic options.


Free hand fighter. I gravitate to it even when its clearly sub-par


Cheapy wrote:

Two-handing a weapon wouldn't give you 1.5x your Strength mod and it wouldn't give you extra damage when power attacking. Or any other benefit.

What fighting styles would you use? Why?

For my character, I would still use two Handed as it is what I picture him doing.


Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Shuriken Nekogami wrote:

full plate has a max dex of +1, unless you are talking about mithril fullplate or have armor training of 2 or better.

mithril is expensive. especially for heavy armor.

also, the Armored kilt has no effect on heavy armor.

Quote:
and where did these characters get the funds for such expensive defensive gear?

It doesn't make it heavier.

As for funding, the average gp for a 10th level character is 62,000 gp.

+2 armor is 4,000 gp plus cost of armor.
+3 shield is 9,000 gp plus cost of shield.
+2 weapon is 8,000 gp plus cost of weapon.

Cheapsauce.

An even more honest comparison would have also included a +1 ring of protection (2,000 gp), +1 amulet of natural armor (2,000 gp), and possibly a +1 insight from a 5,000 gp ioun stone; bringing AC to 33 with a shield or 27 without.

yeah, if you happen to start 10th and pick your gear Ala carte. not everyone has that privilege.

Entirely random equipment hurts everyone. Which is why the game assumes that you will sell off large quantities of anything you dislike, and come with the assumption that you can at least obtain +4 equivalent armors, +2 weapons, and +4 stat items 75% of the time in the largest communities. Nothing I listed in the list was particularly expensive for the character level range they were at. The highest being about 15% wealth by level.

Also. Based on the description of the armored kilt, it still grants the AC increase, but does not have any effect of the weight class of heavy armor. Which is sensible since there is no heavier weight class beyond heavy armor. Since I didn't address that in my previous post to you.

In essence, something is horribly wrong if the warriors couldn't be decked out in such by 10th level without room to spare. It is modest gear for their levels. Their WBL suggests that they could be wielding +3 or better weapons, and even stronger armor, but I went with what was easily available in the standard rules.

Caderyn wrote:
Ashiel why does the 2 handed guy get 9k gold less than the shield guy? One would assume he would at least have a +3 armor considering he decided not to use a shield?

Two reasons.

1) I was not intending to stat out the entirety of their 62,000 gp
2) I assumed they had more or less the same equipment. In a normal game you have reasons to swap gear sets as needed. A 2 hander should have a good shield to back him up, as well as a 1-handed weapon. We could assume both have a +3 armor I suppose. Wouldn't change a whole lot.

The point was pretty simple however. The guy with the 2 hander has less DPR vs the guy with the Sword & Board if the two fight one another with otherwise similar statistics.

ShadowChemosh wrote:

I have this change already in my home games and players are still using Two-handed weapons. The damage dice is still high enough that its worth it. This includes removing Power Attacks +50% for when using two-handed weapons.

So far it does seem to have a nice balance versus the one player using a Longsword and Shield. The players with the Greatsword and Falchion are still one-shot killing things with 18-20 Str characters at levels 1-3.

I am thinking of giving the bonus back at level 6 but I am waiting for more play test to see if its really needed. So overall it didn't change many players builds except to make the one-handed characters to be a little more inline with lower level damage output.

The math is pretty hard to deny at higher levels. There is virtually nothing that separates a dagger from a greatsword at higher levels beyond the static modifiers each are capable of generating. The average damage for a greatsword is 7 damage vs the average of 4.5 for a longsword. A falchion's average damage is 5.

You are effectively giving up a hand to wield one of these. A hand that could be wielding either another weapon and generating additional attacks, or a hand that could be preventing you from dying by increasing your physical evasion by at least 10% (seriously, a non-magic shield is +10% physical evade).

At low levels, the difference is relatively minor. When enemies only have around 5-10 HP, then sure it's great. In fact, sword & board excels even more at low levels because having a high AC at low levels is like being bullet proof and you can still deal enough damage to kill anything you need to because nothing has many hit dice yet (or things that do are higher CR and are tag-team material).

The very idea that a 2 hander should be on the same level with a 1 hander's damage output is ludicrous. That's the whole point of giving them the x1.5 damage increase and power attack bonuses, because those who are not using both hands to wield their weapons are getting other benefits (like not dying). Damage is all a 2 hander has, barring pole-arms.

It just harkens back to when the longsword was the powergamer's weapon, because it was superior in virtually every respect compared to the greatsword. 3.x/PF gave us a reason to choose between them in different circumstances. It is my belief, however, that poor encounter design and certain gaming styles or philosophies reward one style over the other and then complain when characters lean towards those styles.

Most martials in my group carry multiple weapons. Because a greatsword is not going to serve you nearly as well when you have a pile of goblins firing arrows at you from up up hill while you try to close ground. Just like a greatsword is ideal if you need to beat down a single strong enemy with lots of HP and less AC, while a shield helps when you are being mobbed by lower level foes.

Dark Archive

Im with Ashiel on the fact that without the +50% strength and power attack damage I wouldnt use any other 2 handed weapon other than reach ones, because otherwise you are giving up an advantage (a free hand) for 2.5 points of extra damage (which when your static is around +15 isnt really a big deal).

I will admit, I almost never use shields but thats because my PCs are all fighter/rogues or fighter/sorc/DD or fighter/wizard/EK or Magus, and thus all have access to the shield spell (which is better than a shield till level 12+ in most cases), But I would still use the free hand for either casting or just to hold and use wands for my rogue.


I would prefer the derails in a new thread, as I'm trying to get some semblance of data here :-)

Scarab Sages

Cheapy wrote:

Two-handing a weapon wouldn't give you 1.5x your Strength mod and it wouldn't give you extra damage when power attacking. Or any other benefit.

What fighting styles would you use? Why?

The exact same things I am currently playing.

Synthesist/Magus with Rhoka.

Magus with a scimitar.

Synthesist/Bard with a quarterstaff.

Wizard.

I enjoy playing arcane casters. I also prefer high AC without being slowed down by too much armor.


ShadowChemosh wrote:

I have this change already in my home games and players are still using Two-handed weapons. The damage dice is still high enough that its worth it. This includes removing Power Attacks +50% for when using two-handed weapons.

So far it does seem to have a nice balance versus the one player using a Longsword and Shield. The players with the Greatsword and Falchion are still one-shot killing things with 18-20 Str characters at levels 1-3.

I am thinking of giving the bonus back at level 6 but I am waiting for more play test to see if its really needed. So overall it didn't change many players builds except to make the one-handed characters to be a little more inline with lower level damage output.

I'm not surprised that they are still able to kill with one shot at levels 1 to 3. I have a feeling they will start to feel a bit left behind as they level because they will be dealing similar damage to a one-handed weapon without the extra option of AC boosting or using an additional weapon.

Shadow Lodge

Never much cared for two-handers unless I was playing a Barbarian or going for a specific build tactic such as a reach fighter or spiked chain tripper. Found they die too quickly. Sword and board has always been my preferred style, both as a player and in watching my players from the GM side it's been my experience that the S&B fighters live longer and still manage to do plenty of wreckage. The most devastating melee characters I've had to GM for ever were a longsword-and-shield 3.5 Knight and a hammer-and-shield 3.5 Crusader. (Though the longspear-charger Centaur Runt Barbarian is quickly moving into that category, and the katana-and-wakizashi Ronin quick on his heels.)

Silver Crusade

Lemmy wrote:


Even a whole "Ultimate Subterfuge" book. Focused mostly on rogues, ninjas, bards and rangers, with a few options for other classes too.

Don't forget to add options to casters using illusion. Maybe hybrid abilities and such. Would love to see a sniper that actually works at sniping range at a reasonable level.

Staying on the OP's topic: I might try a whip and tower shield thing.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

@Chaepy,

I'd still use my preferred weapons, katana, bastard sword, scimitar. Bastard sword and katana for the one or two handed style, katana and scimitar for the curved blade.

I like swords *shrug* Or shields. Never been one for sword and board, personal style.


Abyssian wrote:
DeathSpot wrote:

Sword and board.

Riuken wrote:
TWF: its only crime is being more feat intensive than 2-handing

But wait, there's more! For a limited time only, you can play a Shoanti warrior (any class...) using the Thunder and Fang feat to TWF with a TWO HANDED WEAPON and a shield. Still not convinced? What if we threw in keeping your AC bonus from the shield with which you were attacking? For free!

Oh, so I guess I'm saying I'd play a T&F TWFer.

I was so disappointed with that feat. A shameful display. Two handed hammer and a shield? Urgh.


Don't forget the +5 hat, +5 waterskin, +5 cufflinks.........


TWF Paladin with kukris.


3.5 Loyalist wrote:
Abyssian wrote:
DeathSpot wrote:

Sword and board.

Riuken wrote:
TWF: its only crime is being more feat intensive than 2-handing

But wait, there's more! For a limited time only, you can play a Shoanti warrior (any class...) using the Thunder and Fang feat to TWF with a TWO HANDED WEAPON and a shield. Still not convinced? What if we threw in keeping your AC bonus from the shield with which you were attacking? For free!

Oh, so I guess I'm saying I'd play a T&F TWFer.

I was so disappointed with that feat. A shameful display. Two handed hammer and a shield? Urgh.

Thankfully it doesn't work the way as stated in the post, but that's for another thread.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If the extra damage bonus from two-handed weapons were to disappear, you'd likely see a more prominent use of shields (because the extra dice damage from two-handers is basically irrelevant), and a renewed emphasis, I think, on Combat Maneuver-oriented builds. Barring high damage, there are very few other roles martial characters can take. This means that they can either go Support or Control.

Support means a little more focus on defense, and supporting allies. Things like the Bodyguard feat and higher dexterity melee builds would become more prominent. Cavalier's would probably get a little more use, mostly because they have so many ways in which they could buff the party.

Alternatively, you'd see more players move towards control, i.e. Combat Maneuver builds. Monks would get MUCH more popular, as they'd actually put out decent damage compared with other classes, and you can choose to specialize in control. Reach weapons would still be in style, because reach is a great way to maintain control over the enemy.

Personally, I'd probably go with a Captain America build. There isn't really a reason not to, in my opinion, since you could put out the same damage as everyone else, have good defenses, and be able to spec for a little CC with Combat Maneuvers.

1 to 50 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / If two-handing a weapon didn't give any extra bonuses, what would you make? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.