So, all in all, I'm starting to think TWF stinks.

[HowlingWolf]

Hey all,

So...I can see the benefit for a Halfing rogue with short swords and weapon finesse, using TWF, but whats the point for the other races? The penalty to attack kind of kills it, doesn't it? It's almost like Power Attack...but without access to useful feats. As far as I see it, you could have two warriors, one with TWF (2 1d6) and one with a two-handed axe or sword (2d6)... So...isn't the guy with the greatsword (or axe) at a distinct advantage?

Greatsword:

Same damage
Same crit chance most likely
No need to waste a feat
No attack penalty!
Strength-powered attack (damage too, of course. multiplied by 1.5?)

Okay, so, a TWF'er could take TW-Defense...well...can't the Greatsword warrior just strap on a buckler and get the same benefit (albeit with a -1 attack penalty, which is still far better than 2, and no wasted feat.)

The only class I can see it working for, in most senses, is the rogue...and only because flanking negates that penalty with it's attack bonus. Even better with a Halfling with maxed dex/weapon finesse.

So, thus, as far as the ranger, barbarian, or fighter go -- they seem to be better off with a two-handed weapon.. Focus on strength. With a str of 16 they'd have 4.5 damage from that, and an average of 6 from the sword or axe.

While the two-weapon fighter would have to use light weapons (1d6 or so),
would likely have to focus on dexterity, and would on average hit less often AND dish out less damage as well.

So............................what exactly is the point of TWF??

[Yora]

You are not the first to think so.

[AstralFire]

Two-Weapon Fighting is miserable without using Tome of Battle (and even then, I don't advocate using the more than the first feat or so at most.)

[Battlemage]

Okay, so, a TWF'er could take TW-Defense...well...can't the Greatsword warrior just strap on a buckler and get the same benefit (albeit with a -1 attack penalty, which is still far better than 2, and no wasted feat.)


You are right, two-handed weapons are better than TWF, but that point doesn't work. You don't get the buckler's armor bonus for the round if you attack with the arm holding it.

[Urpriest]

Your mistake is in thinking there are two-weapon fighters to begin with. TWF is a fighting style for when you have lots of bonus damage, like Sneak Attack or Skirmish. It doesn't make sense if you're just adding Str to damage, and a pure fighter wouldn't take the TWF line to begin with.

[Nettlekid]

The trick is to get static add-ons that do more damage with each attack, so the greater number of attacks is of greater benefit. It's true, that if you're getting twice as many attacks using a 1d6 weapon as you could with a 2d6 weapon, you'd be doing the same damage. But if you did +5d6 with every attack, such as with Sneak Attack, then suddenly it's twice as many attacks with 6d6 damage as you could have with 7d6. And the advantage is obvious.

Similarly, Power Attack, if you can manage to TWF with Power Attackable weapons. At BAB 16 on, you get four attacks, and with the TWF chain you could have up to seven. If you get a 1:1 Power Attack payoff with one-handed weapons and 2:1 with THW, then the THF gets 8*Power Attack cost, and the TWF gets 7*Power Attack cost. Not so great. But if you can make your TWF count as THF as well, such as with the Revenant Blade's Valenar Double Scimitar, suddenly you could be churning out 14*Power Attack cost. And THAT really makes it pop.

[Killer Angel]

Your mistake is in thinking there are two-weapon fighters to begin with. TWF is a fighting style for when you have lots of bonus damage, like Sneak Attack or Skirmish. It doesn't make sense if you're just adding Str to damage, and a pure fighter wouldn't take the TWF line to begin with.

yep. Also rangers, that at least can have it as combat style, need some boost for the damage, given that it's suboptimal even with free feats.

[nedz]

TWF has its uses but it's not the best option for most melee characters.

BTW Look at the Improved Buckler Defence feat (CWar) — also the Two Weapon Defence feats are worthless.

[BowStreetRunner]

Two-Weapon Fighting, Rapid Shot, the monk's Flurry ability, Snap Kick, and similar abilities are all focused around one core concept, increasing the total number of attacks you receive. This is usually done at the cost of reducing your overall attack modifier and in some cases preventing you from using two-handed weapons. If you are getting your damage from strength bonuses, power-attack, and other damage multipliers like Leap Attack, then you will want to focus on two-handed weapons and similar strategies. But if you are getting most of your damage from sneak attack, sudden strike, skirmish, or even your bard cohort hitting you with dragonfire inspiration, every additional attack is potentially a lot more damage.

I am currently playing a Ranger/Warblade/Pious Templar wielding two weapons and regularly hit 7 times per round for an average of 44 damage per hit. I've done the math and going with a two-handed weapon with my setup (as a warblade I can retrain my feats to another weapon if I want) would raise my damage to 49.5 damage per hit, but I would only get 4 hits per round.

[cerin616]

high sword low axe feat

Optimize tripping

Get tons of attacks of opportunities.

You are now somewhat effective at battlefield control.

[Eldariel]

TWF out of the box sucks. The game's inherent weapon style balance is basically "THF or GTFO"; even for TWF-friendly classes like the Rogue, medium BAB + attack penalties and burning 3 of your 7 feats (and probably Weapon Finesse) on TWF feats is a ridiculous investment for basic competency.

As you've noticed, the weapon style is just terribly designed ('cause of AD&D background where you got far fewer extra attacks and there was no increased Strength bonus, let alone Power Attack, for THF and thus TWF was just the best for damage). However, later some supplements gave it a few nice toys; Tome of Battle as the most important providing Stormguard Warrior, Shadow Blade and a ton of maneuvers that actually make it work. But yeah, in a vacuum TWF is kinda ****ty and even fully optimized, THF tends to come out ahead.

[HowlingWolf]

Yeah, but not likely as bad with a Halfling rogue, though I'd bet. :-) Still, though, a strength-powered character with a two-hander is prolly going to do a lot more damage, and with more accuracy.

[Darrin]

So............................what exactly is the point of TWF??

To look awesome. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=15034585)




So, thus, as far as the ranger, barbarian, or fighter go -- they seem to be better off with a two-handed weapon.. Focus on strength. With a str of 16 they'd have 4.5 damage from that, and an average of 6 from the sword or axe.


Ranger can use Swift Hunter to boost his damage, and with the right PrCs can get about the same damage as a Rogue.

Fighter has enough feats to do both THF *and* TWF. Armor spikes can be used as an offhand weapon, and if you want to add Power Attack to your offhand attacks, Improved Unarmed Strike will work just fine. If you're looking to just do TWF, then consider one of the best examples of a thoroughly optimized Fighter 20, Caelic's "Jack B. Quick (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19869062/6_hits_to_1:_Jack_B._Quick)" build, which uses High Sword Low Axe style (longsword/handaxe) to dish out the whoopass.

Barbarian is a bit tougher, as most TWFers are only dipping into there for Pounce, Whirling Frenzy, and maybe Improved Trip. A two-hander with armor spikes/Improved Unarmed Strike is just as decent as any other Barbarian build.



While the two-weapon fighter would have to use light weapons (1d6 or so),
would likely have to focus on dexterity, and would on average hit less often AND dish out less damage as well.


If you're doing TWF properly, your base weapon damage is somewhat irrelevant, although there are a few ways around the whole offhand = light thing (Oversize TWF, Exotic Weapon Master, Revenant Blade 5, Cavestalker 4). There are also a couple ways to make the higher Dex pay off damage-wise (Shadow Blade, Drow Hit-and-Run Fighter), although feat-wise it's still terribly inefficient.

[Nettlekid]

Basically, I'd say that if you make a TWF character with the focus being on the TWF, then yes, it's probably going to do less damage than a similarly optimized THF. But if you have the feats to spare, then it's entirely possible to take a THF and, by adding TWF, make it MORE. By doubling your attacks you're outright doubling the damage you put out. I made a theoretical build of a low-Epic Thri-Kreen who dual wielded Spiked Chains, using Frenzied Berserker's Supreme Power Attack (and the tricks to up the power, like Shock Trooper and Leap Attack) along with the TWF chain (well, Multiweapon fighting, but you know). It ended up being able to drill through stone. And before you shrug, remember that a 5 ft cube of stone has 900 HP. It was doing many thousands of damage per turn, if it got the charge and jump set.

[eggynack]

It's entirely possible to take a THF and, by adding TWF, make it MORE. By doubling your attacks you're outright doubling the damage you put out.
I don't think that works out. If you two hand, you're getting 1.5 times return on strength, and 2:1 power attack (which also translates favorably in the case of frenzied berserker, which you mentioned). Thus, you are absolutely not doubling your damage, even if you get all of the TWF feats for free. I don't even think that you're necessarily increasing your damage. Additionally, normally a spiked chain is limited to two handing, so the advantages that you get from it tend to be limited to two handed weapons. I suppose you have a workaround, but it's not exactly a free one. You're also not really doubling the weapon damage, because two handed weapons tend to do about twice as much damage. So, as the OP points out, the math just isn't favorable for TWF.

[Nettlekid]

I don't think that works out. If you two hand, you're getting 1.5 times return on strength, and 2:1 power attack (which also translates favorably in the case of frenzied berserker, which you mentioned). Thus, you are absolutely not doubling your damage, even if you get all of the TWF feats for free. I don't even think that you're necessarily increasing your damage. Additionally, normally a spiked chain is limited to two handing, so the advantages that you get from it tend to be limited to two handed weapons. I suppose you have a workaround, but it's not exactly a free one. You're also not really doubling the weapon damage, because two handed weapons tend to do about twice as much damage. So, as the OP points out, the math just isn't favorable for TWF.

If you sacrifice the 2:1 output then yes, it is at a loss. But as people in this thread have said, if you manage to keep that (such as by Revenant Blade, or having lots of arms), then it does work out to pretty substantial benefits. And you're still not considering the fact that, yes, a two-handed weapon might do about twice the damage of a one-handed weapon, so twice the attacks with a one-handed weapon are nearly the same as less attack with a two-handed weapon. But if you get more damage with each attack (like with Power Attack) then doubling the attacks DOES double your damage output.

[Garagos]

A houserule I've seen a few times, and one that I personally use in my campaigns, is to roll all the TWF feats into just the first feat, and as the character gains iterative attacks via BAB, allow them the next offhand attack as well. It at least fixes the feat tax problem.

[Gwendol]

Also, crit fishing is typically better with two weapons.

[eggynack]

If you sacrifice the 2:1 output then yes, it is at a loss. But as people in this thread have said, if you manage to keep that (such as by Revenant Blade, or having lots of arms), then it does work out to pretty substantial benefits. And you're still not considering the fact that, yes, a two-handed weapon might do about twice the damage of a one-handed weapon, so twice the attacks with a one-handed weapon are nearly the same as less attack with a two-handed weapon. But if you get more damage with each attack (like with Power Attack) then doubling the attacks DOES double your damage output.
I don't really see a way to get full power attack benefits from two handed fighting incidentally. Revenant blade is a huge feat and level investment, and thri-kreen is as well. These are not things you're getting for free, so you're certainly not able to just turn a two handed fighting build into a two weapon fighting build. You're just kinda handwaving all of these massive investments, and there is an opportunity cost to it all. We've proceeded as if you're getting the TWF line for free, but I believe that it's time that we stopped doing that. All of the things you're suggesting have a huge opportunity cost, and that includes the feat chain itself. It's just a problematic fighting style in general, for the amount that it costs to take it, and for the low amount that it gets you in return.

[AstralFire]

Remember when Ambidexterity was a separate feat?

Man, I really want to know who thought all of this stuff was a good idea.

[Gwendol]

Yes, it's terribly designed both in terms of the feats and the general rule of requiring full attacks to use multiple weapons.

[Emperor Tippy]

TWF sucks straight out the box but it can be made good.

Factotum 1/ Martial Monk 2/ Factotum 7/ Swordsage 10

Factotum is from Dungeonscape.
Martial Monk is from Dragon #310.
Swordsage is from Tome of Battle.

You also want the Decisive Strike and Invisible Fist alternate class features for the monk from the Players Handbook 2 and Exemplars of Evil.

Now Martial Monk gives you two the feats Devastating Critical (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/feats.htm#devastatingCritical) and Spring Attack (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#springAttack) without having to meet the prerequisites.

Pretty much the first rule of TWF is never make full attacks. They are a pain in the ass and tend to suck. If you really want to then replace Spring Attack with Perfect Two Weapon Fighting.

The basic idea of this build is to use Cunning Surge or any of various maneuvers to move yourself into range of your target without using up your move action, at which point you use Decisive Strike. Now all damage you deal to that target for the rest of the round is doubled. So start spending IP on Cunning Surge to keep attacking him (twice per standard action, throw on Snap Kick for 3 times per standard action). Use a Boost Maneuver like Searing Blade and be in a Shadowhand Stance for Shadow Blade to kick in and you end up dishing out tons of damage, and every Crit is a fort save or die.

I would probably go Rogue 1/ Martial Monk 1/ Factotum 8/ Swashbuckler 3/ Exemplar 1/ Swordsage 6 but its the same basic idea.

[Urpriest]

TWF sucks straight out the box but it can be made good.

Factotum 1/ Martial Monk 2/ Factotum 7/ Swordsage 10

Factotum is from Dungeonscape.
Martial Monk is from Dragon #310.
Swordsage is from Tome of Battle.

You also want the Decisive Strike and Invisible Fist alternate class features for the monk from the Players Handbook 2 and Exemplars of Evil.

Now Martial Monk gives you two the feats Devastating Critical (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/feats.htm#devastatingCritical) and Spring Attack (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#springAttack) without having to meet the prerequisites.

Pretty much the first rule of TWF is never make full attacks. They are a pain in the ass and tend to suck. If you really want to then replace Spring Attack with Perfect Two Weapon Fighting.

The basic idea of this build is to use Cunning Surge or any of various maneuvers to move yourself into range of your target without using up your move action, at which point you use Decisive Strike. Now all damage you deal to that target for the rest of the round is doubled. So start spending IP on Cunning Surge to keep attacking him (twice per standard action, throw on Snap Kick for 3 times per standard action). Use a Boost Maneuver like Searing Blade and be in a Shadowhand Stance for Shadow Blade to kick in and you end up dishing out tons of damage, and every Crit is a fort save or die.

I would probably go Rogue 1/ Martial Monk 1/ Factotum 8/ Swashbuckler 3/ Exemplar 1/ Swordsage 6 but its the same basic idea.

How are you using TWF on a standard? Wolf Fang Strike?

[tyckspoon]

How are you using TWF on a standard? Wolf Fang Strike?

Only if you can find a way to make it automatically refresh itself.. I would assume the Dual Strike feat from Complete Adventurer, although it's kind of a bizarre feat (you don't actually attack with both weapons, as such.. it sort of adds your second weapon's damage as a bonus onto the first weapon instead. Weird little thing with unnecessarily complex rules when they could have just left it at 'you can attack with both of your weapons as a standard action. You only get one extra attack from your second weapon when doing this.')

[Emperor Tippy]

How are you using TWF on a standard? Wolf Fang Strike?

You can always TWF on a standard, you just only get one extra attack no matter what (three attacks total with Snap Kick).

Arguably, however, you only get the 1 extra attack on the first standard action and don't get it on all of the others.

Unless you are playing with the Rules Compendium overriding the PHB, in which case if you want to TWF you drop four levels of Factotum and change the Martial Monk spring attack for Perfect Two Weapon Fighting, replacing the Factotum levels with Swashbuckler 3 and Exemplar 1 before replacing the Swordsage 10 with Warblade 8/ Swordsage 2.

The RC makes Two Weapon Fighting royally suck without extreme cheese (which makes it only moderately suck).

With the PHB it only moderately suck and can be made viable with a good sprinkling of cheese.

[eggynack]

I did not know that the rules compendium gave TWF a crazy nerf to the face. That is dumb, in a manner not dissimilar to that of a butt.

[Fitz10019]

The trick is to get static add-ons that do more damage with each attack, so the greater number of attacks is of greater benefit. It's true, that if you're getting twice as many attacks using a 1d6 weapon as you could with a 2d6 weapon, you'd be doing the same damage. But if you did +5d6 with every attack, such as with Sneak Attack, then suddenly it's twice as many attacks with 6d6 damage as you could have with 7d6. And the advantage is obvious.

Note you can get sneaks and skirmish while using a 2-handed weapon, and miss less often.

[Gwendol]

Tippy, how do you get an extra attack on a standard action from the PHB? That's not in the (poorly worded) rules for two weapon fighting is it?

[Rubik]

Two-Weapon Fighting is miserable without using Tome of Battle (and even then, I don't advocate using the more than the first feat or so at most.)EEEEE!!! It's AstralFire!!!

Sorry. I couldn't help myself.

[Karnith]

You can always TWF on a standard, you just only get one extra attack no matter what (three attacks total with Snap Kick).
Are you sure about that? Per the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#fullAttack):

If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon or for some special reason you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks.
(Emphasis mine)

Is there wording elsewhere that contradicts the rules under the full attack section? This language is present in my old copy of the Player's Handbook, too, so it wasn't something that an errata changed.

[tyckspoon]

Tippy, how do you get an extra attack on a standard action from the PHB? That's not in the (poorly worded) rules for two weapon fighting is it?

I'm going to guess the claim is that the Two Weapon Fighting reference to 'you can make an extra attack in a round' over-rides the statement in Full Round Attack that you must make a Full Attack in order to use more than one attack, said statement specifically calling out Two Weapon Fighting as something that requires making a Full Attack to use. If so I find that unconvincing, at best.

[Emperor Tippy]

Tippy, how do you get an extra attack on a standard action from the PHB? That's not in the (poorly worded) rules for two weapon fighting is it?

PHB says on page 160 "If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon."

RC says on page 148 "If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack with that weapon when you make a full attack."

Note the difference, under PHB rules a Two weapon fighter can make 2 attacks (each at -2 if light weapons with the TWF feat) on a standard action attack (and technically can only do this once per round).

Under the RC rules you only get the extra attack when you make a full attack. Which makes it really suck unless you are using Martial Monk for Perfect Two Weapon fighting and then piling on the extra damage along with maxing AB.

Rogue 1 + Craven, Swashbuckler 3, Shadow Blade + Shadowhand Stance, Warblade 14, Swordsage 1, Martial Monk 1, for example.

[Emperor Tippy]

Are you sure about that? Per the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#fullAttack):

(Emphasis mine)

Is there wording elsewhere that contradicts the rules under the full attack section? This language is present in my old copy of the Player's Handbook, too, so it wasn't something that an errata changed.

In the TWF section. It's somewhat rules arguable.

[tyckspoon]

In the TWF section. It's somewhat rules arguable.

Either way you want to use it your plan doesn't work. Per RC clarification, you unambiguously must use a full attack. Per your interpretation of the PHB text, you only get an extra attack on a per-round basis. Since a Factotum does not get extra *rounds* but instead jams a lot of extra actions into his own turn in a single round, you still only get a single off-hand strike regardless of how many times you use Cunning Surge. You still need some mechanism that explicitly allows you to use both weapons as a Standard.

[Emperor Tippy]

Either way you want to use it your plan doesn't work. Per RC clarification, you unambiguously must use a full attack. Per your interpretation of the PHB text, you only get an extra attack on a per-round basis. Since a Factotum does not get extra *rounds* but instead jams a lot of extra actions into his own turn in a single round, you still only get a single off-hand strike regardless of how many times you use Cunning Surge. You still need some mechanism that explicitly allows you to use both weapons as a Standard.
Yeah. When I posted it I forgot about one of my groups house rules.

[T.G. Oskar]

Tsk tsk, Tippy. You're getting soft.

BTW, to solve that: Dual Strike from Complete Adventurer. It imposes a rather hefty penalty on attack rolls (-4 if using a light weapon in your off-hand, else -10), and requires you have TWF and Imp. TWF. However, you can get that without requirements by means of Martial Monk. Since it requires a "standard action", you can enable the trick via Cunning Surge, and High Sword Low Axe for free trips (and then Imp. Trip for free attacks).

The problem will be the low attack bonus, but it's not like you can't fix that, no?

[Emperor Tippy]

Tsk tsk, Tippy. You're getting soft.

BTW, to solve that: Dual Strike from Complete Adventurer. It imposes a rather hefty penalty on attack rolls (-4 if using a light weapon in your off-hand, else -10), and requires you have TWF and Imp. TWF. However, you can get that without requirements by means of Martial Monk. Since it requires a "standard action", you can enable the trick via Cunning Surge, and High Sword Low Axe for free trips (and then Imp. Trip for free attacks).

The problem will be the low attack bonus, but it's not like you can't fix that, no?

Yeah, Dual Strike works on the Factotum build. Drop actually taking TWF from said build though as it doesn't reduce the DS penalty.

[Rubik]

Which makes it really suck unless you are using Martial Monk for Perfect Two Weapon fightingI thought that epic fighter feats were separate from regular fighter feats, and thus wouldn't apply to martial monk? That's why I didn't take it on my monk build in your trial thread.

[Emperor Tippy]

I thought that epic fighter feats were separate from regular fighter feats, and thus wouldn't apply to martial monk? That's why I didn't take it on my monk build in your trial thread.

Epic Fighter is not a separate class than Fighter. The bonus feats are listed as on the fighter bonus feat list. Martial Monk means that you can pick them and since its Monk you get to ignore prerequisites.

[dascarletm]

Also, crit fishing is typically better with two weapons.

Lightning mace shenanigans

[Rubik]

Epic Fighter is not a separate class than Fighter. The bonus feats are listed as on the fighter bonus feat list. Martial Monk means that you can pick them and since its Monk you get to ignore prerequisites....You know, Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting stacks with the TWF, ITWF, and GTWF feats, meaning you get three attacks at full BAB, three at -5, three at -10, and two for each one after that, all at -2 attack bonus.

I'd see about adding that to my monk, but I said I'm finished, and unless I have problems that need to be worked out, I'll leave it as-is.

[nedz]

Ah, Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting: the feat which gives you an extra attack with your off-hand weapon at -17 to hit: Epic.

[Rubik]

Ah, Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting: the feat which gives you an extra attack with your off-hand weapon at -17 to hit: Epic.It's not too bad if you are, say, a supremely optimized monk that makes all of his attacks as invisible, incorporeal touch attacks against flat-footed opponents, yes? Especially when he has enough damage to kill even elder evils or gods in two or three hits, at most, and most creatures in a single hit, even without Power Attack or Brutal Throw.

[Kazyan]

Sure, but then it's not really the PTWF doing the work.

[Starbuck_II]

yep. Also rangers, that at least can have it as combat style, need some boost for the damage, given that it's suboptimal even with free feats.

But Rangers need Dex due to restrictions in armor: Complete Warrior Samurai on otherhand has heavy armor and ignores Dex requirement to TWFing (one useful fact about them).

[Crasical]

Clumsy to get into but a dwarf ranger with dual dwarven waraxes, using Exotic Weapon Master for Uncanny Blow on both of them, Power attacking with Shock Trooper?

You need Oversized Two Weapon Fighter, Weapon Focus, Power Attack, Improved Bull Rush, and Shock Trooper, thought.

[Eldariel]

Clumsy to get into but a dwarf ranger with dual dwarven waraxes, using Exotic Weapon Master for Uncanny Blow on both of them, Power attacking with Shock Trooper?

You need Oversized Two Weapon Fighter, Weapon Focus, Power Attack, Improved Bull Rush, and Shock Trooper, thought.

And Pounce for it to make any sense. Also, the normal Charge-enablers like ToB maneuvers á la Bounding Assault, Sudden Leap or Quicksilver Motion are really valuable.

[tyckspoon]

Clumsy to get into but a dwarf ranger with dual dwarven waraxes, using Exotic Weapon Master for Uncanny Blow on both of them, Power attacking with Shock Trooper?


Have to be two-handing the weapon for Uncanny Blow.

[Crasical]

Have to be two-handing the weapon for Uncanny Blow.

I'm just working off what I read here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10755358&postcount=4).

[Hiro Protagonest]

Have to be two-handing the weapon for Uncanny Blow.

Per the text, it seems that the writer was just really bad at making his intent clear. I believe only the extra strength bonus of Uncanny Blow requires two-handing; the Power Attack bonus works one-handed. This is backed up by the Power Attack rules in the PHB, which would make Uncanny Blow's Power Attack bonus null and void if it worked by the reading that you needed to use it two-handed. This ruling stems from the fact that there's a comma separating the strength multiplier and Power Attack multiplier.

As for Tippy's ruling of being able to use TWF to launch two attacks as a standing action if you aren't using the RC, this also doesn't work. The ruling in the Combat chapter of the PHB for multiple attacks is that if you make more than one attack, it's a full action. TWF doesn't explicitly allow you to use it as a standard action, so the rule is not overwritten.

[Gwendol]

You can always TWF on a standard, you just only get one extra attack no matter what (three attacks total with Snap Kick).

Arguably, however, you only get the 1 extra attack on the first standard action and don't get it on all of the others.

Unless you are playing with the Rules Compendium overriding the PHB, in which case if you want to TWF you drop four levels of Factotum and change the Martial Monk spring attack for Perfect Two Weapon Fighting, replacing the Factotum levels with Swashbuckler 3 and Exemplar 1 before replacing the Swordsage 10 with Warblade 8/ Swordsage 2.

The RC makes Two Weapon Fighting royally suck without extreme cheese (which makes it only moderately suck).

With the PHB it only moderately suck and can be made viable with a good sprinkling of cheese.

That's not so much a nerf as a clarification of existing rules. As JD points out, the PHB makes it clear elsewhere you need to make a full attack to take advantage of extra attacks, as a general rule.

[Lans]

It doesn't make sense if you're just adding Str to damage, and a pure fighter wouldn't take the TWF line to begin with.

If your an exoticist fighter using a pair of the d12 warhammers, you would be getting +14 to hit and 16 to damage between knowledge devotion, weapon specialization line, and the variants +1 to hit and damage that increases every 5 levels it might be worth it

[Talderas]

Your mistake is in thinking there are two-weapon fighters to begin with. TWF is a fighting style for when you have lots of bonus damage, like Sneak Attack or Skirmish. It doesn't make sense if you're just adding Str to damage, and a pure fighter wouldn't take the TWF line to begin with.

This is the basic bit. There are three combat styles that do not leave you a less than 100% utilization.

Two-handed Weapons. Sword and Shield. Two-weapon Fighting.

Each style has a fundamental method. Two-Handed is obvious in increasing the damage per attack. Sword and Shield is meant to decrease your damage in favor of increasing your defense. Two-weapon fighting is meant to increase your damage by virtue of gaining further attacks.

So if you have features or stats that focus on a single attack or a very limited number then two-handed is better. If what you're using for potency is procced on weapon attacks or adds to each attack then often times TWF is far superior. A good example is using Aptitude Keen Scimitars and taking the Lightning Maces tactical feat.