Dual Strike Weapon Trick


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

Silver Crusade

6 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

The Improved Vital Strike prereq is surely supposed to be Improved 2WF right?

Or am I missing something and that actually makes sense somehow?


Improved TWF sounds like the right prereq, but it might be a developer effort to make Improved Vital Strike relevant.

Liberty's Edge

It could be ITWF.
The problem I see is, it would not even be possible to use (improved) Vital Strike with Dual Strike. So maybe they forget a part about how Dual Strike works with Vital Strike.

Otherwise, you can think about it as instead of making a bigger strike with one weapon, you'll do a normal strike, just two times with two weapons. 'Cause you'll add two times your static damage, it should still be more, that one Improved Vital Strike - not in every case, though.


Don't forget the possibility of Two Weapon Rend damage. I realize it's another feat that isn't part of the Weapon Trick requirement. But most TWFers will want TWRend. Being able to move and do two attacks with two lots of static damage and TWRend damage seems like the next step up in "damage from a standard attack" after Improved Vital Strike. I was really confused when I first saw it as well. But after checking it out, I see now problem in IVS as a prerequisite.


Thematically there's a comparison insofar as that the VS line and Dual Strike are both ways to improve your standard action damage.

I don't much like the requirement though because it means Dual Strike is at the end of a four feat chain where two of those feats end up doing absolutely nothing for you.


Squiggit wrote:

Thematically there's a comparison insofar as that the VS line and Dual Strike are both ways to improve your standard action damage.

I don't much like the requirement though because it means Dual Strike is at the end of a four feat chain where two of those feats end up doing absolutely nothing for you.

The feat tax isn't that bad. It's not like a Two Weapon Fighting combatant needs that many other feats.

...

Yeah, it's terrible.


Squiggit wrote:

Thematically there's a comparison insofar as that the VS line and Dual Strike are both ways to improve your standard action damage.

I don't much like the requirement though because it means Dual Strike is at the end of a four feat chain where two of those feats end up doing absolutely nothing for you.

Unfortunately, that's how the VS line works in its entirety. The new feat (improved then greater) completely invalidates the previous one except as a prerequisite. Doubling annoying when there are ways to get the later feats without the former and still get the full benefit (e.g. natural weapon style for Rangers giving IVS at 6th without needing VS).


Well, yeah and that's one of the main reasons why vital strike is kind of hard to swing in most games. It's a pretty heavy feat cost for what it gives you and it's really the ultimate sort of feat tax, because at least Dodge and Mobility do something.

But at least with the Vital Strike line there's a sense of progression. Here there's no real connection at all. It doesn't count as a vital strike either, so you can't even use it with the feats a vital striker would wanna pick up.


Vital Strike is a good feat for TW-Fighters to pick up as it helps ramp damage for rounds where they can't full attack.


*cough* look at the dual strike weapon trick and then say that again. In any event it's pretty obviously a typo.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Dual Strike Weapon Trick All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.