There is pretty much always a -2 penalty when TWFing in your full attack.
It doesn't matter what is in your main hand, just what is in your off hand. You need 1 light weapon for normal penalties. It doesn't matter if the other is light or one handed.
Grabbing two short sword is generally advised though, since they would share feats like weapon focus. Also, a lot of TWF users are high dex, and they would enjoy weapon finesse.
Hello OldSkoolGamer! Let's break this down.
Here is the link to the two-weapon fighting feat and the two-weapon fighting rules for reference. Two-Weapon Fighting
Normal penalties for two-weapon fighting is -6 on attack rolls with your primary hand and -10 for your off hand.
However those penalties are lessened if the off-hand weapon is light (such as a shortsword), making the primary hand only take a -4 penalty and the off hand only take a -8 penalty.
A different way to lower these penalties is to take the two-weapon fighting feat. That would make both the primary and off hand penalties be at -4.
Now if you both take the two-weapon fighting feat and your off hand weapon is light, then the penalty for both your primary and off hand attacks is at a -2. Having your primary hand wield a light weapon doesn't actually change anything, but it does make it easier to take feats such as weapon focus and have it apply to both of your weapons.
Does that make sense? Anything I can clear up in there?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you want to completely negate two-weapon fighting penalties, you can try using the two-weapon warrior archetype for fighters.
Double slice is a very good feat if you are building a strength based two-weapon fighter. Personally I believe that dex-based two-weapon fighters are stronger, but to each their own.
OldSkoolGamer, are you trying to make a Dex based character or a Str based character?
Can you two wep fight with 2 short swords w/o penalty since a sh. sword is a light wep?
Fun fact:
Gladius: The gladius is the favorite short sword of gladiators, with a heavier blade than the standard short sword. It serves well as a slashing weapon. Feats and abilities that affect short swords apply to the gladius.
So even though it isn't on their weapon list, Rogues have proficiency with the gladius. Get Weapon Focus (shortsword) and you basically get Weapon Focus (gladius) for free. The gladius is a superior weapon since it delivers either piercing or slashing damage, but this way you are covered in case you run across any cool magical shortwords.
I may go the route of Dex. and switch up the feats. Being human I'll start with 2.
Ok. As CampinCarl pointed out, Double Slice isn't really worth it for a low-strength build. Weapon Finesse and Two-Weapon Fighting would be my choice unless you are using the Unchained version of the Rogue.
Can you two wep fight with 2 short swords w/o penalty since a sh. sword is a light wep?Fun fact:
Gladius: The gladius is the favorite short sword of gladiators, with a heavier blade than the standard short sword. It serves well as a slashing weapon. Feats and abilities that affect short swords apply to the gladius.So even though it isn't on their weapon list, Rogues have proficiency with the gladius. Get Weapon Focus (shortsword) and you basically get Weapon Focus (gladius) for free. The gladius is a superior weapon since it delivers either piercing or slashing damage, but this way you are covered in case you run across any cool magical shortwords.
I don't read it that way. They way I see it is if you have proficiency in gladius (which is a martial weapon that rogues do not have proficiency in) then you can use your shortsword feats (such as weapon focus) on a gladius.
So this works for a TWF Slayer using shortswords as he has proficiency in gladius, but not for TWF Rogue as she does not have proficiency across all martial weapons.
Can you two wep fight with 2 short swords w/o penalty since a sh. sword is a light wep?Fun fact:
Gladius: The gladius is the favorite short sword of gladiators, with a heavier blade than the standard short sword. It serves well as a slashing weapon. Feats and abilities that affect short swords apply to the gladius.So even though it isn't on their weapon list, Rogues have proficiency with the gladius. Get Weapon Focus (shortsword) and you basically get Weapon Focus (gladius) for free. The gladius is a superior weapon since it delivers either piercing or slashing damage, but this way you are covered in case you run across any cool magical shortwords.I don't read it that way. They way I see it is if you have proficiency in gladius (which is a martial weapon that rogues do not have proficiency in) then you can use your shortsword feats (such as weapon focus) on a gladius.
So this works for a TWF Slayer using shortswords as he has proficiency in gladius, but not for TWF Rogue as she does not have proficiency across all martial weapons.
In the absence of modifiers like 'some,' 'most,' or 'except for proficiency' the phrase "feats and abilities that affect short swords" should be read as "all feats and abilities that affect short swords." Consider the case of a Sorcerer who takes the feat Martial Weapon Proficiency (short sword). It is a feat that affects short swords and therefore, by the plain language of the weapon description, it also applies to the gladius. Since abilities are covered as well as feats, short sword proficiency gained through a class ability or racial ability will also apply to the gladius.
This is hardly a new or radical interpretation. You can find threads discussing this aspect of the gladius ever since Ultimate Equipment came out, and the consensus is as I've described. In fact I'm not sure I've ever run across a dissenting opinion until now. (I mention this to provide context - not as proof that I am correct. It is quite possible for the majority to be wrong.)
Slayer is also an option as I'm not entirely sure I want a full rogue.
I haven't played a Slayer, but I hear that it is a great class.
|
Slayer is also an option as I'm not entirely sure I want a full rogue.I haven't played a Slayer, but I hear that it is a great class.
For a Slayer going TWF - I'd suggest sword & shield. At level 6 you can grab Shield Master - and that feat is amazing and DOES reduce TWF penalties to -0/-0. Not to mention the other side of what it does which is just as good.
I'm with you there.I agree with you. They don't have proficiency with Gladius.
So what part of my argument are you disagreeing with? Do you think that having short sword proficiency through a class ability isn't sufficient, or do you even disagree with the Sorcerer example that I gave?
|
|
So what part of my argument are you disagreeing with? Do you think that having short sword proficiency through a class ability isn't sufficient, or do you even disagree with the Sorcerer example that I gave?I'm with you there.I agree with you. They don't have proficiency with Gladius.
I think that the weapons are entirely different proficiencies, but that feats and abilities (weapon focus etc.) apply to both.
|
If you want to Two-Weapon fight "without penalties" then use daggers and worship Pharasma.
Her Deific Obedience will give you a +2 sacred bonus to hit, which will offset the -2 penalty for TWF. Combine that with the River Rat Trait for +1 to damage with daggers, and you are doing the same average damage as a short sword.
If you want to Two-Weapon fight "without penalties" then use daggers and worship Pharasma.
Her Deific Obedience will give you a +2 sacred bonus to hit, which will offset the -2 penalty for TWF. Combine that with the River Rat Trait for +1 to damage with daggers, and you are doing the same average damage as a short sword.
The penalty is still there.
By that logic, you might as well play a fighter and grab weapon focus/greater weapon focus.
If you want to Two-Weapon fight "without penalties" then use daggers and worship Pharasma.
Her Deific Obedience will give you a +2 sacred bonus to hit, which will offset the -2 penalty for TWF. Combine that with the River Rat Trait for +1 to damage with daggers, and you are doing the same average damage as a short sword.
The penalty is still there.
By that logic, you might as well play a fighter and grab weapon focus/greater weapon focus.
hence the "" when he said without penalties. Implying that it obviously isn't without penalties, but is like without penalties. And having it require 1 feat that anyone can take instead of a path that only a lv8 fighter can take makes it a lot easier way to negate the penalty.
I think that the weapons are entirely different proficiencies, but that feats and abilities (weapon focus etc.) apply to both.So what part of my argument are you disagreeing with? Do you think that having short sword proficiency through a class ability isn't sufficient, or do you even disagree with the Sorcerer example that I gave?I'm with you there.I agree with you. They don't have proficiency with Gladius.
But proficiency is always granted by a feat or ability. It isn't some third type of entity.
To expand on my previous example:
Sorcerers are only proficient with simple weapons. They can still use a short sword or a gladius, but they have to take a non-proficiency penalty of -4 on attack rolls. Imagine a Sorcerer who takes Martial Weapon Proficiency (short sword) and Weapon Focus (short sword). How does this affect his performance with a short sword and a gladius?
Martial Weapon Proficiency (short sword) removes the -4 'to hit' penalty when using a short sword. We know that "feats and abilities that affect short swords apply to the gladius." This is a feat that affects short swords, so by the rules it must also affect the gladius. So now when he uses a gladius, he doesn't suffer from a -4 penalty.
Weapon Focus (short sword) adds +1 to attack rolls when using a short sword. We know that "feats and abilities that affect short swords apply to the gladius." This is a feat that affects short swords, so by the rules it must also affect the gladius. So now when he uses a gladius, he adds +1 to attack rolls.
The reasoning behind both situations is identical. Both are feats which affect short swords, so both also affect the gladius. You seem to believe that the first case is qualitatively different from the second. Can you cite any rules to support your position?