PDA

View Full Version : Einhander?



Faulty
2009-04-19, 09:54 PM
Is there any reason to fight with a weapon in one hand and none in the other? I'm applying to a PbP game here with a fencer type Aristocrat (for flavor)/Swordsage and I'm not sure I want to do TWF due to the -2s to hit and the fact that I'd probably be focusing on my maneuvers, so I was thinking of picking up the Einhander tactical feat from PHBII when I could. It gives its benefits when you fight with a weapon in one hand and nothing in the other. Is this dangerously unoptimzied?

Here's the character (http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheetview.php?sheetid=120599) as he is now. I don't want to be twinked, I just don't want to be gimped, either.

arguskos
2009-04-19, 10:00 PM
You're playing a Swordsage and are worrying about being unoptimized? I think you'll be fine. :smallwink:

More helpful, I like Einhander. It's pretty fun stuff. You may wish to think about abusing feints with things like Imp. Feint, and anyway you can find to get feinting down to a move/swift.

Faulty
2009-04-19, 10:06 PM
Don't be glib. :smalltongue: The only way I can think of that gets feinting down to swift is Beguiler with Imp. Feint. How else is that possible?

tyckspoon
2009-04-19, 10:10 PM
Being a Swordsage can cover a lot of bad decisions, so you'll probably be ok regardless... but Einhander is a pretty rotten feat. Not only would you get more use by using something in your off-hand (a Defending dagger, a buckler, heck, even a light source, depending on conditions), the bonuses Einhander grants can generally be acquired easily and cheaply with common items. +2 Tumble in a limited circumstance is practically nothing, if you're going to Feint people just do it with Bluff instead of jumping through hoops to use a different skill.. the extra Dodge bonus when fighting defensively is nice, but I don't think it's worth a feat and the equipment restriction for what is effectively "Your Combat Expertise is better."

That said, if you want to take it anyway it'd pair nicely with the Deadly Defense (Comp. Scoundrel) and Riposte (Dragon 304, Dungeon Compendium) feats.

Bluebeard
2009-04-19, 10:12 PM
There's Invisible Blade, for one.

But Einhander isn't terrible with ToB-ers. You won't have the same oomph as THFers or TWFers, but maneuvers will carry you in most cases.

If you stick to maneuvers that provide significant damage and effects of their own (like Insightful Strike, the Tiger Claw jumps and such), you'll probably be fine.

[edit:] Oh yeah. The feat itself pretty crummy. It's flashy, but that's usually up to player descriptions anyway.

Faulty
2009-04-19, 10:13 PM
Thanks for the info. Well fencers sometimes fence with a dagger in their offhand, so I guess that could make sense. I'm focusing on attacks that give me multiple rolls, choose touch attacks, etc, but I'm still worried about the -2s from TWF.

The Glyphstone
2009-04-19, 11:06 PM
Remember that the -2 TWF penalty only kicks in if you actually attack with your offhand weapon. If you're just holding a +X Defending Dagger in your offhand and not actually doing anything with it, it won't penalize your attacks any more than a buckler that you aren't Shield Bashing with would penalize your attacks.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-04-19, 11:09 PM
Don't know what game you're talking about, but if it allows homebrew, I know there's at least one set of feats specifically for einhander fighters somewhere on these boards. You'll have to track it down, but IIRC they were pretty good.

Dr_Horrible
2009-04-19, 11:28 PM
What you probably want is a +1 Defending Dagger in your offhand, and a Buckler on the same arm. Then you get a GMW and MV cast on them by your friendly Cleric.

You now have a +7 AC at level 12. +5 at 8. That's way better then what you get from the feat.

sonofzeal
2009-04-21, 01:05 AM
I've done a build almost exactly like the one you're describing. I ended up not going with Einhander just because, eh, underwhelming. Still, the build held up to some fairly rigorous gameplay, and even won a few duels. Does sacrifice on power to maintain the flavour I was going for, and uses several under-powered components, but the result works surprisingly well. The build is here (http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-933609).

So - I wouldn't bother with the Einhander feat, but the combat style itself is manageable.

Shademan
2009-04-21, 01:11 AM
well if you use the einhanders narrow pose and combine it with all the dodge feats and such you can get over 30 in AC at fairly low level

Pronounceable
2009-04-21, 04:33 AM
Also remember that REAL jedi use single sabers.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-04-21, 04:59 AM
Thanks for the info. Well fencers sometimes fence with a dagger in their offhand, so I guess that could make sense. I'm focusing on attacks that give me multiple rolls, choose touch attacks, etc, but I'm still worried about the -2s from TWF.

Actually, an actual fencer (period rapier/sidesword/etc., not modern Olympic) would rarely have fought with one hand empty, because there's no reason to. You want to use a buckler, a dagger, a second sword, or even a cloak in the other hand.

Of course, if you're going for that Hollywood adventure film look (which is pretty much as far from realism as you can get), you may want to only use a single weapon anyway.

Leon
2009-04-21, 07:50 AM
A Free hand allows you a great range of options

Tengu_temp
2009-04-21, 08:28 AM
Also remember that REAL jedi use single sabers.

Not the best advice, since they usually also wield them in two hands.

Faulty
2009-04-21, 09:41 AM
Thanks for all the feedback, guys.


Actually, an actual fencer (period rapier/sidesword/etc., not modern Olympic) would rarely have fought with one hand empty, because there's no reason to. You want to use a buckler, a dagger, a second sword, or even a cloak in the other hand.

Of course, if you're going for that Hollywood adventure film look (which is pretty much as far from realism as you can get), you may want to only use a single weapon anyway.

Well, the character concept has him actually fencing before training as a Swordsage, so I want to try and be reasonably realistic.

Darth Stabber
2009-04-21, 12:37 PM
there is also Single Blade Style from Dragon Compendium. You get +2 ac for not having a anything in your off hand, Though mechanically not as good as a defending dagger after a certain point.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-04-21, 12:51 PM
there is also Single Blade Style from Dragon Compendium. You get +2 ac for not having a anything in your off hand, Though mechanically not as good as a defending dagger after a certain point.That point being the earliest time you can afford a Defending Dagger? :smallwink:

Another_Poet
2009-04-21, 01:17 PM
This might not make a difference to you, but you know that you can get the aristocrat flavour without having levels in the Aristocrat class, right? It's all in the backstory.

If I were you I would opt for a court-acceptable PC class like Fighter, Knight, even a good-aligned Rogue or Bard instead of the Aristo level. None of them are great compared to Swordsage but they're all better than Aristocrat.

If you really don't want levels in another PC class, pick up a level of human paragon instead. After all, the whole reason nobility has "legitimate" authority is that their blood makes them stronger, braver and better than peasants, right? So cash in.

ap

Darrin
2009-04-21, 01:50 PM
A Free hand allows you a great range of options

Not really. Mechanically, it's one of the worst possible fighting styles. Even Sword & Board is more effective, since you at least get a shield bonus to AC.

The problem with Einhander is putting something in that other hand (either a shield or a light weapon) is almost always better than anything the feat can give you:

Narrow Profile: Thanks, but I'll take the +2 shield bonus for when I'm not fighting defensively, which somehow seems to happen 100% of the time I'm fighting anything. If I need to fight defensively, Combat Expertise is a better feat.

Off-Hand Balance: There are much better ways to get +2 to Tumble checks that works every time you need to tumble, such as: 5 ranks in Jump or the Acrobatic feat. Magic items that offer competence bonuses to Tumble checks are also cheap. You always want to avoid spending a feat on something you can replicate by buying an item or casting a spell.

Off-Hand Swap: Okay, this one is actually useful, as there aren't a lot of ways to reduce feinting to a free action. However, if you're looking for a way to sneak attack an opponent, there are a couple dozen other methods that are easier to use and can be used multiple times on the same opponent. Sleight of Hand is also a little more difficult to optimize than Bluff.

Zhalath
2009-04-21, 03:44 PM
I've done a lot of looking at this feat previously. First of all, it's a pain to get, to me, as you have to be about 10ish with anything not a Swashbuckler. Second, the benefits are not useful.
As many have said before me, something in your other hand is better than nothing. If you're a Swordsage, you do get Tiger Claw, which I think supports TWF well.
The only time I've played characters with nothing in one hand is when I had gish-type characters, before I got Complete Mage (for Somatic Weaponry).

Interesting proposal to you. I see that you are lacking in Str. Get the feat Shadow Blade, and wield a short sword in your off-hand. Shadow Blade lets you use Dex instead of Str for damage for any Shadow Hand weapons. Your second hand just got a lot more punch to it.

Faulty
2009-04-21, 04:19 PM
This might not make a difference to you, but you know that you can get the aristocrat flavour without having levels in the Aristocrat class, right? It's all in the backstory.

If I were you I would opt for a court-acceptable PC class like Fighter, Knight, even a good-aligned Rogue or Bard instead of the Aristo level. None of them are great compared to Swordsage but they're all better than Aristocrat.

If you really don't want levels in another PC class, pick up a level of human paragon instead. After all, the whole reason nobility has "legitimate" authority is that their blood makes them stronger, braver and better than peasants, right? So cash in.

ap

Thanks for the suggestion. I might do Swashbuckler.


Interesting proposal to you. I see that you are lacking in Str. Get the feat Shadow Blade, and wield a short sword in your off-hand. Shadow Blade lets you use Dex instead of Str for damage for any Shadow Hand weapons. Your second hand just got a lot more punch to it.

Thanks for the suggestion. I'm thinking of going with a defendign dagger, though. It makes sense given the fencing. I'll keep it in mind, regardless.

Zhalath
2009-04-22, 08:48 PM
Thanks for the suggestion. I'm thinking of going with a defendign dagger, though. It makes sense given the fencing. I'll keep it in mind, regardless.
Daggers are also Shadow Hand weapons. You can still take the feat, and still have the damage.

DragoonWraith
2009-04-22, 09:42 PM
I'm a complete newb who knows nothing about melee characters... but the Duelist (Core) seems perfect for the flavor.

lesser_minion
2009-04-23, 02:27 PM
Remember that the -2 TWF penalty only kicks in if you actually attack with your offhand weapon. If you're just holding a +X Defending Dagger in your offhand and not actually doing anything with it, it won't penalize your attacks any more than a buckler that you aren't Shield Bashing with would penalize your attacks.

I was under the impression that you couldn't use defending weapons without taking TWF penalties, even if you don't make an attack with the other weapon. It cropped up in a 3.0 FAQ (and noted in the second printing of the 3.0 PHB, so it amounts to word of god in this case).

The rules in the SRD also imply that that's still the correct ruling - even though it's a free action to allocate the bonus, you are still required to 'use' and 'wield' the weapon.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-04-23, 03:06 PM
I was under the impression that you couldn't use defending weapons without taking TWF penalties, even if you don't make an attack with the other weapon. It cropped up in a 3.0 FAQ (and noted in the second printing of the 3.0 PHB, so it amounts to word of god in this case).

The rules in the SRD also imply that that's still the correct ruling - even though it's a free action to allocate the bonus, you are still required to 'use' and 'wield' the weapon.

Neither "use" nor "wield" strictly equate to "attack"; and there's no sensible reason to require this. 3.0 FAQs are often worth most when printed and used in place of toilet paper (some of the Sages have given pretty demented advice).

You're already paying extravagantly to get a defending weapon which is, GP for GP, a whole lot worse than a simple magic shield (and always +2 or +3 to AC behind a shield!); why should you be required to also take penalties to your attacks simply to get that small AC bonus you paid 8,000 (for +1 AC) or more gold pieces for? (9,000 gp gets you a shield with a +5 bonus to AC.)

Darrin
2009-04-23, 03:24 PM
The rules in the SRD also imply that that's still the correct ruling - even though it's a free action to allocate the bonus, you are still required to 'use' and 'wield' the weapon.

There are several ways to "use" or "wield" a weapon while attacking with another weapon. For example, you can wear two guantlets, armor spikes, and a spiked shield while attacking with another weapon.

lesser_minion
2009-04-23, 04:27 PM
3.0 FAQs are often worth most when printed and used in place of toilet paper (some of the Sages have given pretty demented advice).

Well, it was actually reprinted in the next print run of the Player's Handbook, so I doubt it was that demented a ruling.

The point was that you couldn't just use your defending dagger as a shield (and it seems inconsistent with other weapon qualities for a character to be able to do so).


You're already paying extravagantly to get a defending weapon which is, GP for GP, a whole lot worse than a simple magic shield (and always +2 or +3 to AC behind a shield!); why should you be required to also take penalties to your attacks simply to get that small AC bonus you paid 8,000 (for +1 AC) or more gold pieces for? (9,000 gp gets you a shield with a +5 bonus to AC.)

Except for the fact that you're paying for +1 to AC or +1 to Attack and damage rolls. That makes the defending dagger not exactly useless in comparison to a shield.

If you still aren't convinced, you can also have defending armour spikes and defending shield spikes by RAW. That in the very least might warrant a few strings attached.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-04-23, 05:29 PM
If you still aren't convinced, you can also have defending armour spikes and defending shield spikes by RAW. That in the very least might warrant a few strings attached.

Nope, all that requires is a tiny bit of DMing. "Naw, dawg." See? Easy. No need for broad and bad rules.

And the dagger is pretty worthless no matter how you shake the comparison. A +3 large shield beats a +1 defending dagger any day. "+1 to attacks and damage OR +1 to AC" isn't nearly as valuable as "+5 to AC". It's somewhat useful for very specific builds (like AC-focused Duelists), and that's it.

And if the ruling didn't make it into the 3.5 DMG, it doesn't apply to 3.5 RAW, evidently enough.

AslanCross
2009-04-23, 05:37 PM
I'm a complete newb who knows nothing about melee characters... but the Duelist (Core) seems perfect for the flavor.

The Duelist can work really well with the Swashbuckler at very high levels, but unfortunately the class's features are so highly restrictive that it's of little use until you've taken seven levels in it. The OP's character, being a swordsage, wants to be in light armor to get his Wisdom bonus to AC. (And optimize his AC while he's at it.) The Duelist's class features mostly require being unarmored, however.

lesser_minion
2009-04-23, 05:47 PM
And if the ruling didn't make it into the 3.5 DMG, it doesn't apply to 3.5 RAW, evidently enough.

It's a point that needs clarification, and the closest thing in existence to a word of god on it is the 3.0 rulebook actually spelling it out. I am NOT condoning the use of that ruling, but to my knowledge it's the official one.

Admittedly, I tend to hand out a bonus for TWF.


Nope, all that requires is a tiny bit of DMing. "Naw, dawg." See? Easy. No need for broad and bad rules.

Rules within a game system should be written so that they do not need changing. A reasonable corollary to this is that DM changes to one part of the system should try to avoid creating the need for further changes or clarifications in the remainder of the system.

It might not be a particularly big deal, but it still goes against that principle.


And the dagger is pretty worthless no matter how you shake the comparison

A defending dagger also has no other penalties attached to the AC bonus it grants. A heavy shield has armour check penalties which may also apply to attack rolls, cannot be combined with a light shield or buckler (another exploit that would have to be banned), and can interfere with the class features of certain classes. A defending dagger has no such problems.

Bluebeard
2009-04-23, 05:52 PM
And the dagger is pretty worthless no matter how you shake the comparison [with shields].


Much in the same way stocking caps are pretty much worthless no matter how you shake their comparison to gloves.

If you're using one, chances are that you've got the other one too.

Benejeseret
2009-04-23, 06:54 PM
Just a thought, but you could also use that other hand for other types of magic items (ie. with the 1.5x non-standard body slot cost) and still it does not 'use a weapon'. Weak...but if you have lots of magic items and want another slot as a slightly reduced price rather the 2x for unslotted.
-> picturing a priest einhander also holding aloft an enchanted chalice or relic.

Other thoughts, Gloves of Arrow Snaring is a decent low/mid level item if your hand is free anyway.

With magic item creation rules and the Gloves of Arrow Snatching as a guide perhaps make the Gloves of Improved Disarm. Twice per day grants Improved Disarm for 4000gp. And since that arms was free...you can choose to take his weapon rather than it just dropping.

Dr_Horrible
2009-04-23, 09:34 PM
@lesser minion

It's not an exploit to have a defending weapon even defending armor spikes, even if you also have a Heavy Steal Shield. Even if you also have an Animated Heavy Steal Shield and are wielding a Spiked Chain.

When you pay money for things, you get AC. That's how it works.

And the fact is, you don't get +1 to attack roles or to AC, you get it just to AC because you never attack with that item.

When you pay 9000gp for +1 AC, even slotless, that's not an exploit, especially not when it only costs 1000gp for a +1 bonus to AC somewhere else, or for god sakes, 165gp for a Buckler, or 6000gp for an effectively slotless +2 to AC.

If someone has already spent a bunch of money on armor/shield/natural/deflection/luck bonuses to AC, then no, it is not an exploit for them to spend more money to get more AC.

You know what else? You want it clarified?

It is clarified. They did it in the 3.5 DMG, when they explicitly choose not to use or include the rule in the 3.0 PHB. It is clarified. You get AC for money. It does work that way.

lesser_minion
2009-04-24, 02:21 AM
And the fact is, you don't get +1 to attack roles or to AC, you get it just to AC because you never attack with that item.

If you just want the +5 to AC and have no intention of using the weapon whatsoever then you might want to look at the custom item rules.


You know what else? You want it clarified?

It is clarified. They did it in the 3.5 DMG, when they explicitly choose not to use or include the rule in the 3.0 PHB. It is clarified. You get AC for money. It does work that way.

That is an interesting way of clarifying something compared with actually writing it explicitly into the rule in question.

Even if it isn't particularly broken like, for example, Assume Supernatural Ability, it is still a pretty weird exploit.