Two-Weapon v. Two-Handed Weapon Expenses

[Segev]

It's commonly said that Two-Weapon Fighting (TWF, e.g. sword and dagger) style has, amongst its numerous disadvantages when compared to Two-Handed Fighting (THF, e.g. greatswords) style, twice the expenses that THF does on weapons. On the face of it, this sounds undeniable. Two weapons means you're paying twice for what the guy wielding just one weapon buys just once, right?

Well...perhaps.

I'm going to use two elemental tags to illustrate the point; feel free to point out how other, non-damage, tags might change this formula. It's an area I have not analyzed in this preliminary thought.

Let's say the THF guy has a +1 Caustic Shocking Greatsword. To do an even comparison wrt accuracy, he uses Power Attack for -2. This gives him (2d6 slashing)+(1d6 acid)+(1d6 electricity)+5 damage on a successful hit. It's a +3-equivalent weapon, costing ~18,300 gp.

Now, obviously, if the TWF guy has to buy two of these, he's spending ~36,700 gp! (Note that the ~700 is due to rounding up the <300 being added twice.)

But...for comparable damage, does he need to?

What if he gets a +1 Caustic Shortsword, and a +1 Shocking Shortsword? The TWF guy has -2 to hit for each of these, matching the power attack our THF guy used. Assuming he hits with both, this gives him (2d6 slashing)+(1d6 acid)+(1d6 electricity)+2 damage. That's 3 less damage per fully-successful round, but let's see how much he's actually spent: He has bought two +2-equivalent weapons, which cost ~8,300 gp each, or ~16,700 gp.

So, purely based on one feat invested for each of these gentlemen, the THF-wielder has spent 1,600 gp more for about 3 more damage per fully-successful round.

These values shift and change depending on how much more power attack the THF guy can afford to take. I think the odds of the TWF guy getting only one attack to hit (and doing half damage on such rounds) is a wash with the fact that the rounds the TWF guy gets one but not the other will be half matched to times the THF guy hits with his one attack and half with rounds the THF guy misses entirely.

Now, as they get iteratives, the THF guy definitely pulls ahead unless the TWF guy keeps investing feats, but that gets into the problem of feat-intensiveness that TWF faces, and is not really a function of the weapon cost.


These cost differences actually only become greater:

When the THF guy moves to a +4-equivalent weapon, he's paying ~32,300 gp. The TWF guy upgrades his primary hand weapon to +3-equivalent, and has now invested a total of ~26,700 gp. Both have added only 1d6 to their damage.

When the THF guy moves to a +5-equivalent weapon, he's spending ~50,300 gp. The TWF-guy, using just two +3-equivalent weapons, has spent ~36,700 gp. If he upgrades one of his weapons to +4-equivalent, he's up to ~50,700. Now, the TWF-guy has spent 400 gp more than the THF-guy, which is fairly well a rounding error at this kind of money. But the TWF-guy has as many as 5 +1d6 elemental tags, while the THF guy has only 4.

+6-equivalent for the THF guy is ~72,000 gp. +5d6 elemental damage
Two +4-equivalents is ~64,000 gp. +6d6 elemental damage

+7-equivalent for the THF guy is 98,000 gp. +6d6 elemental damage
+5-equivalent and +4-equivalent for the TWF guy is 82,000 gp. +7d6 elemental damage

+8-equivalent for the THF guy is 128,000 gp. +7d6 elemental damage (assuming you can find this many "elements")
Two +5-equivalents for the TWF guy is 100,000 gp. +8d6 elemental damage (and you CAN find enough elements, because the two weapons can double up)
Moreover, a +6 and a +5-equivalent is only 122,000 gp, for +9d6 elemental damage (assuming you have 5 "elements" for one of the swords).

+10-equivalent for the THF guy is 200,000 gp, and could hypothetically be +9d6 "elemental" damage.
For this, you can get two +7-equivalents (196,000 gp)! That's a hypothetical +12d6 extra damage.


So...speaking strictly of weapon costs, I think it actually is misleading to say that the TWF style is more expensive than the THF style. You have the ability to spend more (since you could go to dual-wielding +10-equivalent weapons if you wanted), but to maintain effective weapon parity, you actually need to spend LESS as a TWFer than as a THFer.

[bekeleven]

I'm going to use two elemental tags to illustrate the point; feel free to point out how other, non-damage, tags might change this formula.Yep. Just as blaster wizards are often maligned on this board for lack of effectiveness, direct damage with sword enchants is less than optimal. 1D6 makes the difference between an active enemy and a dead one far less often than a debuff or two.


Let's say the THF guy has a +1 Caustic Shocking Greatsword. To do an even comparison wrt accuracy, he uses Power Attack for -2. This gives him (2d6 slashing)+(1d6 acid)+(1d6 electricity)+5 damage on a successful hit.Plus 1.5x STR, and he has the option to further power attack for 2:1 damage:accuracy.


The TWF guy has -2 to hit for each of these, matching the power attack our THF guy used. Assuming he hits with both, this gives him (2d6 slashing)+(1d6 acid)+(1d6 electricity)+2 damage. That's 3 less damage per fully-successful roundMinus strength damage and power attack, which he gets only at 1:1. (note that the way to avoid this issue, oversized TWF, is often considered a completely junk feat.)


Now, as they get iteratives, the THF guy definitely pulls ahead unless the TWF guy keeps investing feats, but that gets into the problem of feat-intensiveness that TWF faces, and is not really a function of the weapon cost.I agree with your central premise. THF is not bad because of the monetary cost.

[Segev]

Er, TWF is not bad because of the monetary cost. I don't think anybody's ever claimed THF was. (I assume it was just a typo, but I wanted to make sure it was clear!)


Yes, I know there are a number of other issues. Power Attack's sheer friendliness to THF and unfriendliness to TWF (especially since you can't use Power Attack with light weapons, which you WANT your offhand weapon to be), the fact that you need additional feats to get all your weapon investments to come to bear as you get iteratives (compared to THF, which gets it all with just the iterative)...

TWF has other weaknesses. Just the "it also costs twice as much gp" premise is what I'm challenging here.

[Snowbluff]

Well, Shuriken. Kukri are really cheap when you morph a pair from a set of 50.

And if PA is your purview, double weapons technically get full PA conversion.

[Dusk Eclipse]

If you use double weapons as two weapons they count as one handed and light, the only way to get double weapons to count as two handed is either two-handing one end or via Revenant's Blade capstone feature (which only works for double scimitars)

[Segev]

And if PA is your purview, double weapons technically get full PA conversion.
Are you sure about that? The off-hand is "treated as light," if I understand double weapon rules correctly. And I don't think you count as two-handing the on-hand weapon at that point, either.

Edit: Ninja-answered above.

[OldTrees1]

I believe your calculation assumes the TWF gets double the attacks of the THF at the same attack bonus. This is true if the TWF keeps up the feat cost for additional attacks and no extra attack (Whirling Frenzy, Haste, Speed) enters the equation.

At higher levels I would expect both to have 1-2 extra attacks at their highest BAB.

What is the cost comparison if we assume +11 BAB and 1-2 extra attacks? (Comparing both GTWF :smallfrown: and TW Rend :smallsmile:) Let's ignore the 3:1 feat difference.

[Snowbluff]

If you use double weapons as two weapons they count as one handed and light, the only way to get double weapons to count as two handed is either two-handing one end or via Revenant's Blade capstone feature (which only works for double scimitars)
Nah, I've been over this. You incur attack penalties as if you were wielding 2 weapons, but you are still holding the weapon in 2. Since Power Attack specifies a two handed weapon (which a Double Weapon is) and not how you are holding them.

Revenant Blade is a portion of the 3 Blades. Warblade/RB/EternalBlade. Soooo fluffy.

[Dusk Eclipse]

That is definitely a rules dysfunction, but by strict RAW it seems you are right....

Makes Revenant Blade's Capstone useless thought.

[eggynack]

Nah, I've been over this. You incur attack penalties as if you were wielding 2 weapons, but you are still holding the weapon in 2. Since Power Attack specifies a two handed weapon (which a Double Weapon is) and not how you are holding them.

That would be true if it weren't untrue. To quote the feat Power Attack, "Normally, you treat a double weapon as a one-handed weapon and a light weapon. If you choose to use a double weapon like a two-handed weapon, attacking with only one end of it in a round, you treat it as a two-handed weapon." Thus, whether power attack works for double value or not depends on how you wield the double weapon.

[Snowbluff]

Except that is entirely wrong, since doubles are clearly not treated as 2 weapons. They are typically listed as a Two Handed weapon.


That is definitely a rules dysfunction, but by strict RAW it seems you are right....

Makes Revenant Blade's Capstone useless thought.

Yeah, I would never allow it, either. Then again, TWF just sucks.

[Greenish]

So...speaking strictly of weapon costs, I think it actually is misleading to say that the TWF style is more expensive than the THF style. You have the ability to spend more (since you could go to dual-wielding +10-equivalent weapons if you wanted), but to maintain effective weapon parity, you actually need to spend LESS as a TWFer than as a THFer.What about utility stuff like Everbright, or stuff needed to pierce various DRs?

[eggynack]

Except that is entirely wrong, since doubles are clearly not treated as 2 weapons. They are typically listed as a Two Handed weapon.
Perhaps, unless we're talking about Power Attack. Power Attack specifies a way that double weapons work within its context, and it's that they work as a one handed weapon and a light weapon. Those rules override pretty much anything else you can find on the subject, because they're about as specific as you can get in terms of the interaction between double weapons and Power Attack. If you find some other ability that doesn't make that specification, make your argument all you want, but in this case the rules are explicitly against you.

[Snowbluff]

What about utility stuff like Everbright, or stuff needed to pierce various DRs?

That's what eternal blade is for. :smalltongue:

[Segev]

I believe your calculation assumes the TWF gets double the attacks of the THF at the same attack bonus. This is true if the TWF keeps up the feat cost for additional attacks and no extra attack (Whirling Frenzy, Haste, Speed) enters the equation.Yes. I specify as much regarding iteratives, noting that it's a difference in feats. You are right in that Haste or Speed will put the split of the weapons' enchantments into disadvantageous territory.


At higher levels I would expect both to have 1-2 extra attacks at their highest BAB.

What is the cost comparison if we assume +11 BAB and 1-2 extra attacks? (Comparing both GTWF :smallfrown: and TW Rend :smallsmile:) Let's ignore the 3:1 feat difference.Ignoring the feat difference is appropriate for this discussion, though I acknowledge it as a problem TWF faces.

As we're assuming the TWF guy gets two attacks for each iterative that the THF guy gets, each iterative actually puts things shifted a bit closer to the TWF guy.

If we have no iteratives, the THF guy has 3 attacks using his one awesome weapon. The TWF guy has 4 attacks total, 3 with his on-hand and 1 with his off-hand. The PA damage applies to each of these, and the bigger the weapon's effective bonus, the more d6s it's adding, as well.

So yeah, those free "max BAB" attacks do lean the efficiency back into the THF guy's favor a bit. It takes about a +1d6 advantage (under my original post's assumptions) for the TWF guy to be keeping up with the +4 from the assumed PA. So an odd number of d6s on the THF guy's single weapon and each of the TWF guy's two weapons doing half-round-up that many d6s is "parity." Each "bonus" attack that isn't doubled by TWF gives, assuming all hits, half-round-down the d6s of the THF guy's single weapon.

Which is a mangled mess of a paragraph. I know what it means, but trying to clean it up for more clarity is escaping me at the moment. I'll try again later.