Question on Two-Weapon Fighting

[Elboxo]

With Two-Weapon fighting with a light weapon in your off hand, both attacks have a -2 penalty, but with Improved Two-Weapon Fighting it says you gain an extra attack with the off-hand weapon with a -5 penalty, is this -5 penalty on top of or instead of the -2 from fighting with two weapons?

[Douglas]

On top of. It's the equivalent of your main hand's first iterative attack.

[AslanCross]

^--This.

All Improved and Greater TWF do is allow you to make iterative attacks with your offhand, which you normally can't do.

[sonofzeal]

...yet another reason why TWF is horribly underpowered, despite what certain developers (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/featpointsystem.html) seem to think.

[Lateral]

...yet another reason why TWF is horribly underpowered, despite what certain developers (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/featpointsystem.html) seem to think.

...That dude has no clue what he's talking about. Natural Spell, Still Spell, and Extend Spell are all 5, while TWF is 11 and Skill Focus, Weapon Focus, and Toughness are all 10. Friggin' Weapon Focus.

Friggin' TOUGHNESS.

[Elboxo]

On top of? Dayaaaamn! -7 for an extra attack......
Makes me now debate if it's worth it xD touch attack at about +1 to hit ( it's the second offhand, at level 10 ) for 1d4 + 19 damage xD or no power attack for +11 to hit and 1d4 + 9 damage .....

[MesiDoomstalker]

...yet another reason why TWF is horribly underpowered, despite what certain developers (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/featpointsystem.html) seem to think.

Picking out some gems of how much fail this link is


(much like how magic missile is a benchmark for spells because it's the best 1st-level spell, and how fireball is your typical 3rd-level area attack spell, etc.)


Something that gives you an extra attack better than an equivalent feat that doesn't.Two-Weapon Fighting is better than Weapon Focus because TWF gives you one more opportunity to use Weapon Focus (and Power Attack, and Weapon Specialization, and Cleave, and Improved Critical, and Improved Disarm...) .


Some feats are worth more to some classes than others. In particular, metamagic feats are better for spontaneous casters than preparing casters; that's because a metamagic feat for a spontaneous caster is like adding an entire new complement of spells, which is great since they have few spells but many spell slots. Eventually we'd need to work out some sort of cost modifiers for such things, but for now be aware that metamagic feats should cost more (probably just +1 or +2) for spontaneous casters.


Acrobatic=9
Combat Casting=10
Natural Spell=5
All Metamagics=5
Two-Weapon Fighting=11



Great Fortitude=10: a benchmark for defining what plus to a single save is worth a feat

Skill Focus=10 a benchmark for defining what plus to a single skill is worth a feat

Toughness (5 hp) 10 a benchmark because your typical creature with 1d8 and this feat is going to have max hp compared to the same kind of creature without it; handy because it's half the fighter hp from a d10 and just over the max for a wizard's from a d4; also evenly divisible by 5 so you could have the option of buying extra hp at the price of 1 hp per 2 feat points

Weapon Focus=10 a benchmark because a fighter with his chosen weapon will get to use this feat every round of combat, all day; the epitome of usefulness; defines a standard of "+1 to attack" for a feat; helps set the parameters of "would I rather take another (stackable) Weapon Focus, or some other feat that gave me a special attack or removed an attack penalty?"

Weapon Specialization=10 a benchmark because a fighter with his chosen weapon will get to use this feat every round of combat, all day; the epitome of usefulness; defines a standard of "+2 to damage" for a feat; helps set the parameters of "would I rather take another (stackable) Weapon Specialization or some other feat that gave me a damage bonus or removed a damage penalty?"

[MightyPirate]

...yet another reason why TWF is horribly underpowered, despite what certain developers (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/featpointsystem.html) seem to think.

Wow, I hope no one was planning on making an archer any time soon. That's pretty rough. :smalleek:

[Gavinfoxx]

Two weapon fighting is a piece of junk. If you want to fight with two weapons, get +6 bab and hold two weapons, and use your +1 on the second weapon. Or just fight with greatsword / armor spikes. Or Spiked Shield (two handed, of course..) / Armor spikes...

[Douglas]

On top of? Dayaaaamn! -7 for an extra attack......
Makes me now debate if it's worth it xD touch attack at about +1 to hit ( it's the second offhand, at level 10 ) for 1d4 + 19 damage xD or no power attack for +11 to hit and 1d4 + 9 damage .....
It is, at least, only for the extra attack, not for all attacks. It changes an attack routine from (for example) +10/+10/+5 to +10/+10/+5/+5. The attacks you already had are unaffected.

[Emperor Tippy]

...yet another reason why TWF is horribly underpowered, despite what certain developers (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/featpointsystem.html) seem to think.

Well, you can build some beastly TWF builds but they are as optimized as most high end caster builds and still end up just being mostly competitive.

[Strormer]

How to build a TWF beast:

Exotic Weapon Prof (Bastard Sword)
Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting
+3 Speed Bastard Swords
As soon as you go epic get Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting and Two-Weapon Rend, provided epic is in your gaming future.
Final Attacks: 20/20/15/10/5/20/20/15/10/5 per round and rend if you hit with one attack on each hand.

Or you could magically sprout a second head and/or set of arms and whip out the PTWF and/or Multiweapon Fighting.

[Gavinfoxx]

<Lots of bad optimization advice>

Hahah, quit teasing them!

...Oh wait, are you being serious?

[dgnslyr]

Just... no. Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting generally averages out to +1 damage per weapon, not much better than Weapon Focus. Exotic Weapon Proficiency is likewise a +1 damage per weapon, so for two feats you're getting... +2 damage. That's not really a whole lot.

TWF is generally considered a very inefficient fighting style because you end up doing about the same damage as a two-hander while eating attack penalties. The advantage over two-handing is not the damage, but the number of hits, so effects that are applied on-hit are what make TWF remotely useful, namely stuff like Sneak Attack and Skirmish. Unfortunately, precision damage is its own can of worms because both are precision damage, and precision damage gets rendered completely useless against certain enemy types.

Also I'm tired and kinda grouchy today so maybe I'm not noticing sarcasm as well at the moment.

[Ravens_cry]

Eh, it's a bit of a pet peeve when someone only mentions what the build can do at 20. Sure, it might be good, but it doesn't help in the levels when, at least in all groups I have been in, people actually play. ifa build is only play able at high levels, in most campaigns it isn't actually very useful. Unless you are playing a replacement character, being supercharged for 5% of play time and sucking the rest is a less than enjoyable experience.
As for practical, on topic advice, find a source of massive damage bonus. If you can by pass the immunities and/or take abilities that give you half bonus either way, sneak attack can be a boon for two weapon fighting.
Craven can also be useful, or so I am told.

[Thespianus]

...yet another reason why TWF is horribly underpowered, despite what certain developers (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/featpointsystem.html) seem to think.

This link is probably the saddest thing I have ever read about any RPG. :smalleek:

Well, I like the idea behind the Feat Point system, but... the table... the table...

Natural Spell + Augment Summoning = Toughness(3 hp) + Snatch Arrows :smallsmile:

[sonofzeal]

This link is probably the saddest thing I have ever read about any RPG. :smalleek:

Well, I like the idea behind the Feat Point system, but... the table... the table...

Natural Spell + Augment Summoning = Toughness(3 hp) + Snatch Arrows :smallsmile:
The only saving grace is that he correctly recognizes in the opening lines that Endurance is terrible and Power Attack is sweet.

But yeah, it says a LOT about the developers of D&D, if that's what passed for common wisdom among them during the writing of the PHB.

[chadmeister]

On top of? Dayaaaamn! -7 for an extra attack......
Makes me now debate if it's worth it xD touch attack at about +1 to hit ( it's the second offhand, at level 10 ) for 1d4 + 19 damage xD or no power attack for +11 to hit and 1d4 + 9 damage .....

It's not bad, if you're already going the TWF route. If you accept two attacks at -1 are better than one attack at +1, at 6th level, Improved TWF gives you two attacks at +4 and two at -1, rather than one at +6 and one at +1.

Nah, as I write that, I realize that's wrong. I got it while playing a TWF ranger, but it's not worth an extra feat. The first TWF feat should give your extra attacks in your off hand.

[Jandrem]

How to build a TWF beast:

Exotic Weapon Prof (Bastard Sword)
Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting
+3 Speed Bastard Swords
As soon as you go epic get Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting and Two-Weapon Rend, provided epic is in your gaming future.
Final Attacks: 20/20/15/10/5/20/20/15/10/5 per round and rend if you hit with one attack on each hand.

Or you could magically sprout a second head and/or set of arms and whip out the PTWF and/or Multiweapon Fighting.

Replace Bastard Sword with Warmaces(Complete Warrior) and we're talking...

The -2 AC kind of sucks, but swinging a d12 weapon in each hand is pretty awesome.

[Venger]

The only saving grace is that he correctly recognizes in the opening lines that Endurance is terrible and Power Attack is sweet.

But yeah, it says a LOT about the developers of D&D, if that's what passed for common wisdom among them during the writing of the PHB.

Well, as is common knowledge among players by now, playtesting for 3.5 was... limited, to say the least

for example:

the player of vyena, the druid with antlers (wtf) on her head, did not cast many spells, use wild shape, or use natural spell, which is why the playtesters didn't see any balance issues with the druid and as a result didn't put in any mitigating factors for it

they also only played up to around level 7-9, so never actually tested out the higher level stuff, so never saw what was wrong with it.

from what I understand, the sample characters we've all come to know and love (krusk ftw) were the actual builds of the guys playing this game for playtesting.

and that's terrible.

I am a little confused about TWF now, I thought I understood how it works, but it appears as though I am wrong.

let's say that I am a swashbuckler3/fighter2/dread pirate 2 with a dex of 17+. I have a base attack of 7, so I get 2 attacks on a full attack action.

if I have improved TWF (dread pirate gives TWF as a bonus feat at lvl 1) then is the breakdown like this:

1st atk: +3 (+7 BA -4 from TWF) right hand
2nd atk: -2 (+2 iterative -4 from TWF) right hand
3rd atk: +3 (+ 7 BA -4 from TWF) left hand
4th atk: -2 (+2 iterative -4 from TWF) extra attack from improved TWF

TWF is hard, but weapon finesse does make it a little easier, since you're going for quantity over quality fighting like this, if you're making 4 attacks/round and 2 of them are likely to miss, it's still better than only 2 (in theory anyway) not factoring in the opportunity cost of the better feats you could've taken

[umbergod]

Am I reading that feat point system table right? Why is he listing toughness as giving 5 hp when it gives 3? Has Sean Reynolds lost his mind or did he just take stupid pills when writing that article?

[Douglas]

I am a little confused about TWF now, I thought I understood how it works, but it appears as though I am wrong.

let's say that I am a swashbuckler3/fighter2/dread pirate 2 with a dex of 17+. I have a base attack of 7, so I get 2 attacks on a full attack action.

if I have improved TWF (dread pirate gives TWF as a bonus feat at lvl 1) then is the breakdown like this:

1st atk: +3 (+7 BA -4 from TWF) right hand
2nd atk: -2 (+2 iterative -4 from TWF) right hand
3rd atk: +3 (+ 7 BA -4 from TWF) left hand
4th atk: -2 (+2 iterative -4 from TWF) extra attack from improved TWF

TWF is hard, but weapon finesse does make it a little easier, since you're going for quantity over quality fighting like this, if you're making 4 attacks/round and 2 of them are likely to miss, it's still better than only 2 (in theory anyway) not factoring in the opportunity cost of the better feats you could've taken
Generally you're going to want a light weapon in your off hand, not a one-handed weapon, and that reduces the penalty. With 17 dex and Weapon Finesse, you'll also want your main hand weapon to be either light or specifically finessable (like a rapier).

With +7 BAB, 17 dex, Weapon Finesse, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, and a pair of light weapons, your full attack would look like this:
1st attack: +8 (+7 BAB, +3 dex, -2 TWF) main hand
2nd attack: +8 (+7 BAB, +3 dex, -2 TWF) off hand
3rd attack: +3 (+7 BAB, +3 dex, -2 TWF, -5 iterative) main hand
4th attack: +3 (+7 BAB, +3 dex, -2 TWF, -5 iterative) extra off hand from ITWF

Additional bonuses such as Weapon Focus, masterwork, magical enhancement, etc., would improve all of these attacks.

[Venger]

Generally you're going to want a light weapon in your off hand, not a one-handed weapon, and that reduces the penalty. With 17 dex and Weapon Finesse, you'll also want your main hand weapon to be either light or specifically finessable (like a rapier).

With +7 BAB, 17 dex, Weapon Finesse, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, and a pair of light weapons, your full attack would look like this:
1st attack: +8 (+7 BAB, +3 dex, -2 TWF) main hand
2nd attack: +8 (+7 BAB, +3 dex, -2 TWF) off hand
3rd attack: +3 (+7 BAB, +3 dex, -2 TWF, -5 iterative) main hand
4th attack: +3 (+7 BAB, +3 dex, -2 TWF, -5 iterative) extra off hand from ITWF

Additional bonuses such as Weapon Focus, masterwork, magical enhancement, etc., would improve all of these attacks.

no, I know, I was just using as few numbers as possible so I could see if I got the underlying mechanic right. it appears as though that was the case. thanks for the breakdown, I appreciate it. I'm aware it's best to use light weapons. (cutlasses ftw)

improved TWF seems worth it for a dedicated melee SAer. is greater TWF worth it? that's a lot of feats, even for an SA machine. I can't imagine that -12 (less BA and dex) will hit much, even at the higher levels with flick of the wrist.

[navar100]

Players in my group use it, even when not a rogue, and don't have problems with it. Scratch that, one minor problem. They do feel disappointment they can't attack with both weapons after moving more than 5ft, but it's not a major issue for them. They hit often enough and are fine with the damage.

The DM doesn't feel the need to have every bad guy needing a natural 17 or so to be hit even when using just one weapon. There are particular bad guys who are hard to hit. The two-weapon users would then just attack with one weapon. They don't feel cheated. They don't absolutely need to use every feat they have all the time every time. There are plenty of combats where they can use their two weapon fighting at full capacity and be effective doing it.

[umbergod]

Correct me if I am wrong, but why would a SA based character want to dual wield? It was my understanding that SA only applies to one attack per turn, not all of them.

[jindra34]

Correct me if I am wrong, but why would a SA based character want to dual wield? It was my understanding that SA only applies to one attack per turn, not all of them.
As long as you can maintain the conditions for SA you can add it as many times per round as you like.

[Douglas]

Sneak attack applies to every attack that qualifies, however many that happens to be. If you're attacking from stealth or regular Invisibility, you lose that after one attack and the rest are normal. If you're attacking with Greater Invisibility or flanking, that stays for your whole turn and every attack is a sneak attack. More attacks = more sneak attacks = lots more damage.

[umbergod]

Huh, i just re-read the SA rules and wording, and I can't honestly figure out why I thought it only applied to one attack per round >.< Was it that way in 3.0? Maybe thats where I got this silly idea from

[herrhauptmann]

Correct me if I am wrong, but why would a SA based character want to dual wield? It was my understanding that SA only applies to one attack per turn, not all of them.

Depends on the reason for the sneak attack.
If it's because you're invisible, then only 1 attack of the round.
If it's because you're flanking him, and he's stunned and tied up, then all of them.

Then you take the feat Craven. Add your level to all sneak attacks you make. So the level 7 dread pirate above, if he took rogue 1 at level 8 then he'd add 8 to each sneak attack he made. If he's getting sneak attack from flanking, that's potentially +32 damage (8 per hit times 4 hits). And Craven multiples on crits.

Ranged sneak attack however, that might be a little different. Ask someone else about getting SA on every arrow used in a round.

[docnessuno]

How to build a TWF beast:

Exotic Weapon Prof (Bastard Sword)
Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting
+3 Speed Bastard Swords
As soon as you go epic get Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting and Two-Weapon Rend, provided epic is in your gaming future.
Final Attacks: 20/20/15/10/5/20/20/15/10/5 per round and rend if you hit with one attack on each hand.

Or you could magically sprout a second head and/or set of arms and whip out the PTWF and/or Multiweapon Fighting.

Wrong.
How optimize TWF:
Str 10
Get a secondary stat to damage (dex works wonder)
Get as many extra damage sources as you can (sneak attack is the standard)
Low-op example:
Thug 16 / Swordsage 2 / broodclaw master 2
Weapon fitnesse, shadow hand, TWF chain, Craven
Assuming dex 34 (18 + tome + 5 increments +6 item), small size and +5 weapons
+38/+38/+33/+33/+28/+28/+23/+23 for 1d3+37+10d6

[tyckspoon]

Huh, i just re-read the SA rules and wording, and I can't honestly figure out why I thought it only applied to one attack per round >.< Was it that way in 3.0? Maybe thats where I got this silly idea from

Not that I remember, although it's been a long time since I actually had my hands on 3.0 books. The main source of it seems to be people's preconceptions; if you're not too familiar with the rest of the absurdity that is D&D 3.5, you might look at Sneak Attack, compare it to the rest of the lackluster options that melee has for doing damage (especially in Core) and go "huh, that's a lot of damage! There has to be some kind of limit on this, doesn't there?" (And there are, more of them than there really should be for a class's primary combat shtick, but most of them aren't immediately obvious from reading the Sneak Attack feature.) So since there clearly isn't a per-day limit, you invent a one-attack-per-round limit, because that seems right to you.

Or you have some familiarity with other editions of D&D which have similar rules and you're forgetting what bit of trivia goes with which version of the rules.

[Douglas]

There may have been a once-per-round limit on AD&D's equivalent, I'm not sure. 4e does limit it to once per round.

For those not familiar with the system and optimization potential, once per round for something with no per-day limit may seem at first glance to already be pretty high damage and bring a kneejerk "that must be 1/round because more would be broken" reaction.

Confusion about this is fairly common, and is a result of both erroneously carrying over limitations from other editions and making poor assumptions about what quantity of damage output is balanced. Certain common methods of achieving sneak attack are limited to once per round, and the existence of these methods also contributes by having people assume without thinking about it that the limit is on sneak attack rather than the particular method of qualifying for it.

[Fenix_of_Doom]

...yet another reason why TWF is horribly underpowered, despite what certain developers (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/featpointsystem.html) seem to think.

Thanks for the link, I think it is potentially a great system(although the writer had no sense of balance). Having the choice of taking for example either one good feat(power attack) or three really crappy feats(skill focus: jump, dodge and toughness) seems like it might make the utterly worthless feats sort of viable again(I'd probably still just get a good feat in most cases though).

[JoeYounger]

...yet another reason why TWF is horribly underpowered, despite what certain developers (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/featpointsystem.html) seem to think.

Idk man, I've seen several two weapon fighting builds that werent bad at all. I mean, if you're in it for a high OP build then there are better things than TWF, but TWF can hold its own if you're just playing a moderatly OP'd game.

I mean, you're effectively taking -2 on all of your attacks, and losing what, 3 feats?

At level 6, as a fighter you'll have:
6 bab, + 1 weapon focus, +1 weapon, +4 str.
That puts your attack sequence at 10/10/5/5

Lets look at a few monsters:

Ettin has an AC of 18
Babau has an AC of 19
half black-dragon with 4 levels of fighter has an AC of 24
Monsterous centepede has an AC of 18
Wyvern has an AC of 18
minotaur Zombie has an AC of 16

looking at these guys they average just shy of a 19 AC

So, your primary attacks have like a 55% chance to hit, and your secondary attacks have a 30% chance when you're unbuffed. I'd be very suprised if you werent able to get at least a +3 to hit from the rest of your group. Wizard, cleric, bard? That would take you up to a 70% with your first set and a 45% with your second.

Looking at dmg we'll say a d6+7 for dmg, or a d6+10 buffed.

Thats an average of 18 dmg in a round unbuffed or 23 dmg buffed not taking into account the 18-20 threat range that will be 15-20 once he gets +8 BaB from imp crit.



Compare that to the same fighter using a greatsword.

6bab, 1 weapon, 1 feat, 4 str for an attack sequence of
+12/+7

so a 65% chance and a 40% chance unbuffed or a 80% chance and a 55% chance buffed.

That puts his dmg at 17 unbuffed or 26 dmg buffed.


TL:DR you're looking at roughly the same amount of dmg TWF or using a two hander. It all comes down to what flavor you want. I really like the TWF builds. Yes, you dont hit as hard, but built right, when you do hit, you almost always crit. especially nice once you pick up katori-resin scimitars.

[Venger]

Wrong.
How optimize TWF:
Str 10
Get a secondary stat to damage (dex works wonder)
Get as many extra damage sources as you can (sneak attack is the standard)
Low-op example:
Thug 16 / Swordsage 2 / broodclaw master 2
Weapon fitnesse, shadow hand, TWF chain, Craven
Assuming dex 34 (18 + tome + 5 increments +6 item), small size and +5 weapons
+38/+38/+33/+33/+28/+28/+23/+23 for 1d3+37+10d6

that is pretty good. a simpler way of this is:

rogue 4 (because if you take 3 might as well stay for uncanny dodge)
swashbuckler 16

gives int to damage (and lets you dump str w/ free weapon finesse)

daring outlaw
craven
flick of the wrist
TWF chain

winning

10d6 SA and nearly full BA with 4 iteratives. same number of attacks as your guy (I think) with a little less hoop-fu. I like your build though. I'd be scared to fight him :smallbiggrin:

[docnessuno]

that is pretty good. a simpler way of this is:

rogue 4 (because if you take 3 might as well stay for uncanny dodge)
swashbuckler 16

gives int to damage (and lets you dump str w/ free weapon finesse)

daring outlaw
craven
flick of the wrist
TWF chain

winning

10d6 SA and nearly full BA with 4 iteratives. same number of attacks as your guy (I think) with a little less hoop-fu. I like your build though. I'd be scared to fight him :smallbiggrin:

Thanks.
My favored combo is actually:
marrowlurk (2d6 SA) 3 - Wizard 2 - Daggerspell mage 3 - Abjurant champion 4 - arcane trickster 8 (with LA buyback)
BAB +16, arcane strike channeling a lvl8 spell (+8 hit +8d4 dmg), 7d6 SA, wraithstrike to hit touch AC

[Venger]

oo, that's sneaky! have you ever tried luckstealer? similar mechanically/fluffwise, if no SA

[AslanCross]

Weapon Focus=10 a benchmark because a fighter with his chosen weapon will get to use this feat every round of combat, all day; the epitome of usefulness; defines a standard of "+1 to attack" for a feat; helps set the parameters of "would I rather take another (stackable) Weapon Focus, or some other feat that gave me a special attack or removed an attack penalty?"

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v312/AslanCross/jackie-chan-meme.png

That...that...is one of the most ridiculous claims I've ever seen about game balance in D&D. :smalleek:"It's always on and stackable, therefore even if it's a piddly bonus it is a good benchmark for a good feat!"?!

[Elboxo]

That...that...is one of the most ridiculous claims I've ever seen about game balance in D&D. :smalleek:"It's always on and stackable, therefore even if it's a piddly bonus it is a good benchmark for a good feat!"?!

Toughness is stackable and you use it all day....... So is dash........

:/

can anyone suggest a full-BaB prC that gives +1d6 sneak attack from level 1? That would be great for TWF builds, combined with Craven, it'd work perfectly for my build....

Edit: Ronin is nice, just need that feat spare... Invisible blade is nicer, at level 2 with my build that's an extra 8 hp lost per round.... or 8d6 sneak attack >:D

[MesiDoomstalker]

Toughness is stackable and you use it all day....... So is dash........

:/

can anyone suggest a full-BaB prC that gives +1d6 sneak attack from level 1? That would be great for TWF builds, combined with Craven, it'd work perfectly for my build....

Edit: Ronin is nice, just need that feat spare...

Nightsong Enforcer, Complete Adventurer. Needs Improved Initiative, Hide 10, 10 Move Silently, BAB +5, and some Disguise. Double checking. Checked. No disguise but you still need Evasion class feature.

[Venger]

Toughness is stackable and you use it all day....... So is dash........

:/

can anyone suggest a full-BaB prC that gives +1d6 sneak attack from level 1? That would be great for TWF builds, combined with Craven, it'd work perfectly for my build....

Edit: Ronin is nice, just need that feat spare...

Invisible blade gives full SA from lvl 1 and has full BA. it requires a lot of wasted feats since it used to be 1 class w/ master thrower, but if you take those levels too, then you don't care.

I am a little confused about what you mean by +1d6 SA from lvl 1. do you mean that starts progressing it then? if so, IB might work for you.

[Elboxo]

Invisible blade gives full SA from lvl 1 and has full BA. it requires a lot of wasted feats since it used to be 1 class w/ master thrower, but if you take those levels too, then you don't care.

I am a little confused about what you mean by +1d6 SA from lvl 1. do you mean that starts progressing it then? if so, IB might work for you.

That's exactly correct, I was just looking at that, I'd need to change feats around, but then HELLO SNEAK ATTACK

[Nagukuk]

Replace Bastard Sword with Warmaces(Complete Warrior) and we're talking...

The -2 AC kind of sucks, but swinging a d12 weapon in each hand is pretty awesome.

I see what you did there...

Why don't you size them up and Monkey hum ... I mean Monkey Grip them too

:smalleek:

[Gnaeus]

that is pretty good. a simpler way of this is:

rogue 4 (because if you take 3 might as well stay for uncanny dodge)
swashbuckler 16

gives int to damage (and lets you dump str w/ free weapon finesse)

daring outlaw
craven
flick of the wrist
TWF chain

winning

10d6 SA and nearly full BA with 4 iteratives. same number of attacks as your guy (I think) with a little less hoop-fu. I like your build though. I'd be scared to fight him :smallbiggrin:


Thanks.
My favored combo is actually:
marrowlurk (2d6 SA) 3 - Wizard 2 - Daggerspell mage 3 - Abjurant champion 4 - arcane trickster 8 (with LA buyback)
BAB +16, arcane strike channeling a lvl8 spell (+8 hit +8d4 dmg), 7d6 SA, wraithstrike to hit touch AC

Getting there. But for sneak attacking, I'll throw my vote to Marrolurk, Rogue 4/Swashbuckler 9/Swordsage 2 (Assassin or Spellthief 1).

daring outlaw
craven
Quick Draw
Rapid Shot
TWF chain

You throw flasks of acid or fire to target touch ac. Use Greater Invis or blink to give the sneak attack.

[Siosilvar]

I see what you did there...

Why don't you size them up and Monkey hum ... I mean Monkey Grip them too

:smalleek:

Because Monkey Grip doesn't work with the off hand.

And it's a terrible feat. Not unlike Oversized TWF and EWP (Bastard Sword).

Somebody had to break the sarcasm chain.

[Venger]

That's exactly correct, I was just looking at that, I'd need to change feats around, but then HELLO SNEAK ATTACK

np, good luck

[dgnslyr]

It's not a PrC, but there's a fighter variant that gets Sneak Attack at a rogue's progression instead of fighter feats. Also, swordsage may not be full BAB, but a dip at level 9 or higher qualifies you for Assassin's Stance, which is +2d6 sneak attack damage, which is worth considering. If you don't want the BAB hit, you can pick up that stance by spending two feats, but that might be a bit too steep a cost for your build.

[Venger]

avenging executioner is a little difficult to wrangle, but its sudden strike stacks with SA and it's got some great wintimidation if you can get into it in time to use it in the midlvls when you're still routinely encountering things that aren't fear-immune

[Ravens_cry]

It's not a PrC, but there's a fighter variant that gets Sneak Attack at a rogue's progression instead of fighter feats. Also, swordsage may not be full BAB, but a dip at level 9 or higher qualifies you for Assassin's Stance, which is +2d6 sneak attack damage, which is worth considering. If you don't want the BAB hit, you can pick up that stance by spending two feats, but that might be a bit too steep a cost for your build.
I think 2d6 more sneak attack, and a good bit more besides, is worth an approximately 5% reduction in hit probability, especially with Thug Sneak Attack Fighter. And it's a base class, so no wasting feats on Prestige classes especially considering how feat intensive TWF is.
One reading, at least to me, of the sneak attack Fighter is every time you give up a fighter feat you gain 1d6 sneak attack, is the reverse true, can you decide not to take a sneak attack dice and take a feat instead?

[tyckspoon]

One reading, at least to me, of the sneak attack Fighter is every time you give up a fighter feat you gain 1d6 sneak attack, is the reverse true, can you decide not to take a sneak attack dice and take a feat instead?

garr. No, this is not how Sneak Attack Fighter works. Gain: Sneak Attack (as Rogue) means you remove the Bonus Feats entirely and copy over the Rogue's Sneak Attack progression, including the levels where it's advanced; notably, you don't get 2d6 SA for dipping 2 levels in it.

And yes, the reverse option is there as well- a Rogue who gives up Sneak Attack entirely to get Fighter Bonus Feats instead. It's not really a level-by-level option, tho; the class variants swap those features entirely. You're not a Rogue-who-decided-he-wanted-a-feat-this-level. You're a Rogue who doesn't know how to Sneak Attack at all because you have feats instead.

[Venger]

garr. No, this is not how Sneak Attack Fighter works. Gain: Sneak Attack (as Rogue) means you remove the Bonus Feats entirely and copy over the Rogue's Sneak Attack progression, including the levels where it's advanced; notably, you don't get 2d6 SA for dipping 2 levels in it.

And yes, the reverse option is there as well- a Rogue who gives up Sneak Attack entirely to get Fighter Bonus Feats instead. It's not really a level-by-level option, tho; the class variants swap those features entirely. You're not a Rogue-who-decided-he-wanted-a-feat-this-level. You're a Rogue who doesn't know how to Sneak Attack at all because you have feats instead.

Yes. This is correct. It does not say "replace each instance of the fighter's bonus feat with 1d6 SA" it says "replace feats with SA using as rogue "

just like martial rogue says you replace SA with fighter bonus feats "as fighter" which means a 2 lvl dip in martial rogue gets you 2 fighter feats

by the same token of logic, as tyckspoon surmised, it takes 3 lvls of SA fighter for 2 dice of SA

although you could always go rogue1/SAfighter1 if you really wanted 2d6 SA, for faiths of eberron's most excellent thief of life, for example and generic expert was banned. this scores you another point of BA over stuff like ninja/spellthief/etc normally used for early 2d6ness. combine the thug fighter with SA fighter (which stack, obviously) since you don't care about heavy armour anyway.

rogue1/thug SA fighter1/thief of life 10/xx8

I know it's breaking the "no odd lvls of fighter" rule, but this way, fighter only gives things at odd levels. getting all of thief of life's a level early is more than worth it and you can always go back into rogue for evasion and stuff like that later if you really want to. if you go rog2, you're not actually saving time, but you will have evasion and an extra point of BA over Wotc's theoretical thief of life. plus you get to be immortal, which is cool


And yes, the reverse option is there as well- a Rogue who gives up Sneak Attack entirely to get Fighter Bonus Feats instead. It's not really a level-by-level option, tho; the class variants swap those features entirely. You're not a Rogue-who-decided-he-wanted-a-feat-this-level. You're a Rogue who doesn't know how to Sneak Attack at all because you have feats instead.

yep. what that is is a substitution level, like changeling rogue or halfling rogue or shifter druid, where you only swap out the relevant level (and it is a level-by level option, you don't have to take all of a substitution level which hadn't been invented when unearthed arcana came out (I think) so we got this half-baked thing instead. the good news is with all the ACFs/feats/subs/etc out there, you can build pretty much whatever you want if you try hard enough

[Strormer]

Well, that build went fine for the two games I played it in, mind you, we're not heavy optimizers so I'm only bringing my experience to the table, though I admit, warmaces would be even better. The BS is just my personal favorite. I should really say build with OTWF and whatever high damage one handed weapon you can swing, then enchant them as a pair and make sure to have speed in there to get the extra hit in since that's your schtick. SA or skirmish or anything like it would also kick. I usually added in barbarian for my rp reasons, but admittedly anything adding precision damage would be more helpful and I tended towards ranger as well, so I was flanking all the time with my animal companion.

I do, however, defer to those more versed on op-fu than I.

[JadePhoenix]

You know, I was recently thinking about a Swordsage/Alchemist/Wildrunner build.
Shadow Blade for Dex to damage, Alchemist's mutagen for +4 Dex, Wildrunner for +6 Dex. And you're a Swordsage, so you have stuff like Wolf Fang Strike. this gets online at level 6, and you only REALLY need a single level of both Swordsage and Alchemist (you could add 3 levels of Ranger, so you'd qualify easily for Wildrunner).
It only uses ToB, Pathfinder's Advanced Player's Guide and Races of the Wild.
To add insult to injury, go into Champion of Corellon Larethian afterwards and get the Sword of Graceful Strikes (or the Agile enhancement from Pathfinder, or both). That's Dex x3 to damage (x4 if you can stack Agile on the SoGS).
Drow Fighter would add Dex again against flat-footed targets.