Two Weapon Fighting

[Archival,etc.]

Two weapon fighting appears to be largely useless right now. Double slice is only barely better than just attacking twice and only the fighter and ranger can even gain it. Without double slice, you still have the same number of attacks at the same penalties with no apparent advantage. I could see maybe using two different weapons, but what if I want to use two daggers on a rogue? (my gripes with knives notwithstanding).

In PF1 and 5e, any class can effectively dual wield. I don't see why that has been changed.

[DrunkWolf]

I hear you. I wanted to build a dual wielding rogue but didn’t see any low level feat or trait that can help my build. Perhaps I need to read more about multi-classing with fighter or ranger to get the double slice feat but that seems like a slow, inefficient and out of character progression (dont need to train in heavy armor to learn to dual wield).

The Double Slice does provide some good value though. It basically allows you to make 2 attacks at your full attack bonus (no multiple attacking penalty of -5 on your 2nd attack). It is not clear if you get additional damage (“combine the attacks’ damage and then add any other applicable ehancements”), but it is nice to unify the damage for calculating weakness and resistances.

Normally you would only have a 3rd attack at a -10. But if you spend a hero point, I guess you can have a 3rd and 4th attack, both at -10. Using two agile weapons would come in handy here as you would be trading the 0/0/-10/-10 penalties for 0/0/-8/-8 when spending your hero points. Too bad these seem to be awarded less frequently. Perhaps there is a more advanced feat that does something similar that I haven’t read yet.

[Hunterofthedusk]

Double Slice does provide some good value as Drunkwolf mentioned, as the two attacks are at your current bonus assuming you're wielding an agile weapon and the damage is combined. I do wish that Dual Wielding was opened up beyond class feats, because as it stands if you're anything other than a fighter or ranger, you'll have to take the Fighter Dedication multiclass feat at 2nd level, then Double Slice at 4th level if you want to effectively fight with two weapons

DrunkWolf wrote:

Normally you would only have a 3rd attack at a -10. But if you spend a hero point, I guess you can have a 3rd and 4th attack, both at -10. Using two agile weapons would come in handy here as you would be trading the 0/0/-10/-10 penalties for 0/0/-8/-8 when spending your hero points. Too bad these seem to be awarded less frequently. Perhaps there is a more advanced feat that does something similar that I haven’t read yet.

Also, Hero Points are awarded per session rather than at level up now, which is something that my group has houseruled for awhile now, so you do get them more frequently than in 1E

[TheFinish]

DrunkWolf wrote:

I hear you. I wanted to build a dual wielding rogue but didn’t see any low level feat or trait that can help my build. Perhaps I need to read more about multi-classing with fighter or ranger to get the double slice feat but that seems like a slow, inefficient and out of character progression (dont need to train in heavy armor to learn to dual wield).

The Double Slice does provide some good value though. It basically allows you to make 2 attacks at your full attack bonus (no multiple attacking penalty of -5 on your 2nd attack). It is not clear if you get additional damage (“combine the attacks’ damage and then add any other applicable ehancements”), but it is nice to unify the damage for calculating weakness and resistances.

Normally you would only have a 3rd attack at a -10. But if you spend a hero point, I guess you can have a 3rd and 4th attack, both at -10. Using two agile weapons would come in handy here as you would be trading the 0/0/-10/-10 penalties for 0/0/-8/-8 when spending your hero points. Too bad these seem to be awarded less frequently. Perhaps there is a more advanced feat that does something similar that I haven’t read yet.

The thing is though, you get the lessened penalties by just using an Agile weapon, it doesn't need to be off-hand or anything. A guy with two daggers and a guy with a rapier both get the same penalties in the end.

Two-Weapon Fighting is now just the domain of class feats, and only Fighters/Rangers get those (Fighters more than Rangers), which means if you want a TWF Rogue you're out of luck, better Multiclass. And that's just really bad design.

[Archival,etc.]

I've been thinking about 2e all night and I think I have a house rule that would help with two weapon fighting.

Basically, how I'd run it is anyone can use double slice, but if you don't have the feat you have a penalty (-2 for agile and -4 for not). Additionally, you don't combine damage, these are separate attacks so DR and resistances apply to both attacks normally.

I haven't tested it yet or done any math and it still sucks that you'd never be as effective as a ranger or fighter, but it preserves the feat and allows twf to be viable so it's what I'll run with when I get people together to fully playtest this.

[Doktor Weasel]

TheFinish wrote:

The thing is though, you get the lessened penalties by just using an Agile weapon, it doesn't need to be off-hand or anything. A guy with two daggers and a guy with a rapier both get the same penalties in the end.

Two-Weapon Fighting is now just the domain of class feats, and only Fighters/Rangers get those (Fighters more than Rangers), which means if you want a TWF Rogue you're out of luck, better Multiclass. And that's just really bad design.

This is pretty terrible. I was looking at doing a two-weapon barbarian, but that's not possible without multi-classing apparently. Only fighters and rangers can do it? That's a really arbitrary and restrictive move. Removing such basic options from the game just feels like we're being straight-jacketed into particular roles. Oddball builds should not just be viable, but more viable than PF1, not less. The modularity of characters should allow for more flexibility. Just doing two normal attacks with different weapons is pretty weak-tea compared to a real two-weapon fighting. Making classes more restrictive is a step backwards, not forward. Customization is supposed to be the strength of Pathfinder.

[master_marshmallow]

Sadly it's the most viable style.

I hate the action tax system, but this is a feat that actually does make you slightly better instead of worse which means it's our defacto style around which the rest of the combat feats are going to have to be compared.

The benefits:

• secondary attack upgraded to primary, improving crit/hit chance by 25%
• damage is combined into a single hit for the purposes of resisitance
• if using the right weapons, some of the feat chain works for you

The downsides comparatively speaking come into what you said about making multiple attacks being better, though that would be done with the impression that there's an alternative feat which is better. Sudden Charge. That's about it.