Problems with Two-Weapon Fighting

[ZeroSpace9000]

I've recently had some ideas on how to make dual-wielding a generally more attractive option, but in the interests of thorough research, I figured I should see what is and isn't in need of fixing.

So what are the problems with TWF? Please note, I'm not a new player wondering what the deal is, I'm just seeking out feedback on the matter.

[eggynack]

As a quick list, it has a high feat tax, you generally deal less damage unless you have bonus damage, you have to pay more to enchant two weapons than one, and the actual weapons you use are usually worse, because THF ones tend to get more reach and tripping. I think that covers most of it. A usual solid start is shoving the whole TWF line into one feat.

[OldTrees1]

Even if you don't smash the TWF feats into one, at least allow the player to buy ITWF via the Glove of Balanced Hand[8000gp, MIC].

[spectralphoenix]

The dexterity requirements for the later feats are also a major deterrent for heavy armor types. 19 dexterity simply isn't going to happen for a heavy armor user.

[Techwarrior]

The dexterity requirements for the later feats are also a major deterrent for heavy armor types. 19 dexterity simply isn't going to happen for a heavy armor user.

This is, in my experience, why TWF gets so much flack. Greater Two Weapon Fighting is a trap. If you're hitting at -12 to hit, something is wrong.

Two Weapon Fighting's biggest issue isn't the requirement for two weapons, it isn't DR, it isn't the dex prereq, and it isn't the feat tax. The problem is that it can only be used for a full attack. If it functioned more like Snap Kick, TWF would be much easier to work with.

[eggynack]

This is, in my experience, why TWF gets so much flack. Greater Two Weapon Fighting is a trap. If you're hitting at -12 to hit, something is wrong.

Two Weapon Fighting's biggest issue isn't the requirement for two weapons, it isn't DR, it isn't the dex prereq, and it isn't the feat tax. The problem is that it can only be used for a full attack.
There're a lot of problems, really. I think the damage factor is a pretty major one, as all of these flaws could be considered worth it if you were dealing a significantly greater chunk of damage with two weapons. However, before precision, you generally come out at par at best, and that's after all the other problems.

[Scow2]

How to fix two-Weapon fighting:

Make the penalties -4/-6 without any feats. For a single feat, they become -2/-2. If you're using a light weapon, reduce the penalty by a further 2 for the opposite hand. - two one-handed weapons is -2/-2. Two light weapons are 0/0. A one-handed and light is -0/-2.

Instead of adding attacks to the attack routine as normal, make it so that each attack a player gets is also allowed an off-hand attack.

[AMFV]

How to fix two-Weapon fighting:

Make the penalties -4/-6 without any feats. For a single feat, they become -2/-2. If you're using a light weapon, reduce the penalty by a further 2 for the opposite hand. - two one-handed weapons is -2/-2. Two light weapons are 0/0. A one-handed and light is -0/-2.

Instead of adding attacks to the attack routine as normal, make it so that each attack a player gets is also allowed an off-hand attack.

It's pretty nice, it's still going to fall behind damage-wise though without a source of precision damage, since you can't power attack for 2 to 1, get the 1.5 strength or use shock charger.

A good solution might be to add a second feat that gives Int or Dex to damage, preserving the whole feel of the swashbuckling fighter type, then you'd be slightly more MAD, but you'd be part of the way back to the strength point. Or allow something that would be the equivalent of power attack that increases with smaller weapons or more attacks.

[Greenish]

The usually cited problems with TWF:

Feat cost: You need TWF, and you probably want ITWF so you don't feel like a sucker for the jumping through the hoops for a single attack. The gloves help, but many people dislike relying on items for core functions.

Use limits: Full attacks only. If you want to attack with both weapons as a standard, that's a (terrible) feat. If you want to attack with both weapons on AoO, that's a feat. Getting pounce or other free movement is pretty key for most melee builds, but none so much as TWF.

Ability score requirements: Not impossible, but other combat style feats (PA, Combat Expertise, etc.) have noticeably lower requirements.

Damage reduction: You're making more attacks at (usually) lower damage, so DR hurts extra. Also,

Cost of two weapons: You need two [material] weapons to pierce a given DR. You have two weapons to enchant up to snuff. (You do get more from the enhancements that, say, add a flat effect on hit.)

Lack of reach: There are exactly two reach weapons that don't require two hands. Both are exotic, and both are somewhat off the beaten path.

Lack of damage: Having a fixed source of extra damage on each attack basically fixes this, but without such, Power Attack (with all its support) just wipes the table with TWF.


Of these, the two first ones are probably the greatest, and the ones most fixes touch on. The execution varies, but most of the good TWF fixes I've seen make it one (or at most two) feats and allow you to make an off-hand attack for every main-hand attack, like Scow suggests.

[Scow2]

It's pretty nice, it's still going to fall behind damage-wise though without a source of precision damage, since you can't power attack for 2 to 1, get the 1.5 strength or use shock charger.

A good solution might be to add a second feat that gives Int or Dex to damage, preserving the whole feel of the swashbuckling fighter type, then you'd be slightly more MAD, but you'd be part of the way back to the strength point. Or allow something that would be the equivalent of power attack that increases with smaller weapons or more attacks.

It's still inferior to THF for fighting single tough foes, but what it lacks in raw damage, it makes up for in flexibility: You're still doing 2d6+1.5x STR if you dual-wield short swords (And in Pathfinder, still get -1 for +3 damage on Power Attack). It's not "Optimal", but it also makes Weapon Specialization a bit more appealing now that it's a single feat (Or not, if you go two shortswords and fight at 'standard' TWF penalties). You get two chances to hit someone, or hit two someones, or trip (Disarming is harder because light weapon). Not as RAH SMASH! as a two-handed build, but it opens up a lot more tactical options.

Oh yeah - and allow both attacks to be taken at any point on the movement if used with the Spring Attack chain, making the Tempest PrC functional as it was supposed to be again!

[Ravens_cry]

This is, in my experience, why TWF gets so much flack. Greater Two Weapon Fighting is a trap. If you're hitting at -12 to hit, something is wrong.

I've seen it work. My Pathfinder Ninja took it and sliced and diced things quite effectively. Stacking the right buff spells and effects means that, yes, you can have a reasonable chance to hit with even -12 to hit.

[Seharvepernfan]

In my houserules, I did a number of things to fix the issue.

Foremost, many feats are now combat abilities with prerequisites. Have 13 str? Now you have power attack. Have 15 dex? TWF. A bab of +1 or greater? Weapon finesse. The same goes for Imp and Greater TWF, and I even added a fourth; supreme TWF (bab +16, dex 21+).

Then, I lowered the cost of weapon enhancements to match that of armor.

Then, I allowed TWF's to attack twice on standard attacks and charges.

Then, I used a ranger fix that lets people with the TWF line use TWF, even without the dex requirements, even in heavy armor.

[Thiyr]

Currently playing a twfer in a game using this (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=3140.0), with some additional rules/adjustments (notably, the addition of a flat 2k enchantment forcing two weapons to use the same enchantments, and allowing me to power attack with light weapons). It actually works out quite well. It means that using two weapons isn't my ONLY thing, while still letting it be an effective thing. Even ignoring the feats lower down on the list, it's quite useful.

[WbtE]

Before starting to fix T-WF, it's worth setting out what you think it should do. If history is a guideline, it wasn't a popular battlefield style due to the usefulness of the shield and the reach and power of two-handed weapons. There was more enthusiasm for T-WF in dueling schools because it allowed for flashy tricks and unpredictability, especially because both hands held a weapon that could parry or attack. However, the "extra attacks" model doesn't seem all that plausible unless the warrior is just swinging from the shoulder for unimpressive damage.

Now, D&D is fantasy, so T-WF can do pretty much whatever you like. But what is it that you want it to do?

[Khedrac]

And another problem or 2 with 2-weapon fighting:

If you get stunned you drop whatever you are holding - so you now have 2 items to retrieve not 1 when compared with the one-weapon fighter.

Sheathing weapons now takes a full round to put both away (2 move actions) compared with one move action for one weapon.

Yes Quick Draw gets both out as free actions, but yo are paying a large feat tax, so do you even have Quick Draw? If not, you can only draw one weapon as part of a movement...

And similar, so not only do you have all the problems listed above doing damage, you take longer to prepare to attack or to switch weapons when needed.

[Scow2]

And another problem or 2 with 2-weapon fighting:

If you get stunned you drop whatever you are holding - so you now have 2 items to retrieve not 1 when compared with the one-weapon fighter.

Sheathing weapons now takes a full round to put both away (2 move actions) compared with one move action for one weapon.

Yes Quick Draw gets both out as free actions, but yo are paying a large feat tax, so do you even have Quick Draw? If not, you can only draw one weapon as part of a movement...

And similar, so not only do you have all the problems listed above doing damage, you take longer to prepare to attack or to switch weapons when needed.People actually pay attention and use these rules? And, actually, with Two-Weapon Fighting, you can retrieve/draw both weapons at once in the same action.
If you have the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, you can draw two light or one-handed weapons in the time it would normally take you to draw one. And, by TWFing, you can also pick up two weapons at the same time ("Disarming" the ground with each hand).

[eggynack]

People actually pay attention and use these rules?
Apparently. I think there's some arbitrary form of credit deserved, as I don't think I've ever seen those issues presented relative to TWF, and that's over the course of innumerable threads stretching on for infinite pages.

[Talya]

Before starting to fix T-WF, it's worth setting out what you think it should do. If history is a guideline, it wasn't a popular battlefield style due to the usefulness of the shield and the reach and power of two-handed weapons. There was more enthusiasm for T-WF in dueling schools because it allowed for flashy tricks and unpredictability, especially because both hands held a weapon that could parry or attack. However, the "extra attacks" model doesn't seem all that plausible unless the warrior is just swinging from the shoulder for unimpressive damage.


I've often thought about this. I do think TWF should give extra attacks, but not the way they're given now. I believe TWF should act more like a tactical feat.

For example (these are completely off the cuff, making them up as I go. No real thought put into this):

(1) You take advantage of your opponent's missteps by attacking him while his main weapon is engaged with yours. When wielding two weapons, any attack by your opponent that misses provokes an attack of opportunity. This attack is free, and does not use up your attack of opportunity for the round. (note that shield usage could have a similar tactical type feat that negates this.)
(2) You fake with one hand while the other does the dirty work. Once per round, as a free action, make a feint with one weapon. You then attack with the other weapon as a part of a standard or full round action. If your feint is successful, your opponent is flatfooted against this attack, and the attack automatically threatens a critical hit.


Haven't thought up a third usage yet, but you get the point.

[Ravens_cry]

Lots of things are immune to feint though. Plus, it rules out non-melee uses of TWF, like two crossbows, since you can only feint in melee.
The 'attack of opportunity that isn't an attack of opportunity' just strikes me as rather clumsy.

[Talya]

Plus, it rules out non-melee uses of TWF, like two crossbows, since you can only feint in melee.


This is true. Most of the other issues could be worked out with some short rewriting of the above, but it does mess up dual-wielding ranged attackers.

I'm not sure how broken up I am about that. As unusual as Two Weapon Fighting has been as a real world combat form (historically), John Woo-style dual pistol usage simply doesn't exist as a practical form of combat in real life. If people can't shoot two handguns reliably, crossbows are even less likely. But like I said, I didn't give it any thought, I'm sure it could be tweaked. It could be made to work.

[eggynack]

Well, you don't necessarily have to tweak this thing to fit that thing. There can just be a separate tactical feat. As for the main feat, that AoO ability seems quite powerful. That alone would see a bunch of play in Jack B. Quick style AoO builds. It might be good enough for its own feat, especially if you use stuff like miss chance instead of AC as your method of avoiding attacks. I'd just make it an AoO too. Also, it's not clear in the text, but is this attack necessarily taking place with your off-hand weapon? As for the other one, I get the feeling that automatic critical threatening could produce problems of some kind. Like, maybe with those weapons that have bonus effects on a critical hit. That might be a feature though, rather than a bug. Anyways, I definitely like the idea of adding some tactics and maneuvering to TWF, and the general ideas attached seem nifty. There's definitely some room for growth there, especially if you end up filling a niche that THF doesn't.

[Scow2]

Make "Crossbows/Wands Akimbo" a seperate feat from TWF entirely.

I do like your idea for TWF, though... but I'd make the counterattack an Immediate Action, the Feint a Swift Action, and give a passive +1 Shield bonus to AC.

[Ravens_cry]

This is true. Most of the other issues could be worked out with some short rewriting of the above, but it does mess up dual-wielding ranged attackers.

I'm not sure how broken up I am about that. As unusual as Two Weapon Fighting has been as a real world combat form (historically), John Woo-style dual pistol usage simply doesn't exist as a practical form of combat in real life. If people can't shoot two handguns reliably, crossbows are even less likely. But like I said, I didn't give it any thought, I'm sure it could be tweaked. It could be made to work.

The point is it takes away something that the feat, heck, the general ability, could do before, that some players may have wanted to do. Mythbusters showed that (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HhY2xQr0zw), while less accurate than the weaver stance, you could get a surprising amount of accuracy with two pistols. Certainly more than the sideways 'gangsta' grip, so it's not as inaccurate as it might sound.

[Seharvepernfan]

Now, D&D is fantasy, so T-WF can do pretty much whatever you like. But what is it that you want it to do?

Well, in D&D, there's only two groups of people who regularly use TWF: rangers and rogues, surely neither of which got much coverage by historians. :smalltongue:

[Grayson01]

Here is how I would start to fix it

Two-weapon Fighting: When weilding two weapons or a double weapon you get an extra attack with you off hand at the same attack bonus as the main hand attack on all attack actions. You apply full str bonus to both attacks due to your your training in fighting with two weapons. (Using same penalties as the old -4/-4 and -2/-2
Pre-Req: DEX 13


Two-weapon Power Attack: weilding two weapons or a double weapon you can subtract from your base attack bonuse up to 5 points and adding 2 points to damage for ever 1 point subtracted.
Pre-Req: Dex 13 Str 13

Strong Two Weapon fighting: When weilding two Weapons or a Double weapon you add 1.5 to your main hand weapon.
Pre-Req: STR Dex 13 STR 16

Two Weapon Defence: when weilding two weapons or a double weapon you gain +2 to AC at ECL 6 your AC bonus improves to +3 ECL 11 +4 and at ECL 16 +5
Pre-Req: Dex: 16

[Telonius]

In my own houserules, TWF grants an extra attack with each iterative. Improved and Greater still exist, but each reduce the TWF penalties by one each (so TWF-Ranger still gets something semi-useful for Combat Style).

[Scow2]

Here is how I would start to fix it

Two-weapon Fighting: When weilding two weapons or a double weapon you get an extra attack with you off hand at the same attack bonus as the main hand attack on all attack actions. You apply full str bonus to both attacks due to your your training in fighting with two weapons. (Using same penalties as the old -4/-4 and -2/-2
Pre-Req: DEX 13Full strength on both attacks works (5e did this as the "Two Weapon Combat Style", but requires two light weapons until you take the TWFing feat.



Two-weapon Power Attack: weilding two weapons or a double weapon you can subtract from your base attack bonuse up to 5 points and adding 2 points to damage for ever 1 point subtracted.
Pre-Req: Dex 13 Str 13How about merely allowing Power Attack to apply to Light weapons? Why are you giving TWFers EVEN MORE damage from power attack than a Two-handed user?


Strong Two Weapon fighting: When weilding two Weapons or a Double weapon you add 1.5 to your main hand weapon.
Pre-Req: STR Dex 13 STR 16Wat.

[AMFV]

The point is it takes away something that the feat, heck, the general ability, could do before, that some players may have wanted to do. Mythbusters showed that (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HhY2xQr0zw), while less accurate than the weaver stance, you could get a surprising amount of accuracy with two pistols. Certainly more than the sideways 'gangsta' grip, so it's not as inaccurate as it might sound.

I don't know it might be the Marine in me, but for ten feet away that is not very accurate at all. You'd be hard-pressed to cover the grouping with your hand and for ten feet off that's pretty awful. Also there were absolutely zero shots in the black, which is really really bad at that range, although I'm not sure of his level of training. I would imagine that the weaver stance pulls ahead significantly when you're trained, and also when you're not staring at the target.

However that's beside the point, and two-weapon fighting is a trope in fantasy stuff, which is why it should be included. D&D isn't about simulating real life, it's about simulating works of fiction. Since that is a common thing in those I can't see why it shouldn't be included.

[Ravens_cry]

I don't know it might be the Marine in me, but for ten feet away that is not very accurate at all. You'd be hard-pressed to cover the grouping with your hand and for ten feet off that's pretty awful. Also there were absolutely zero shots in the black, which is really really bad at that range, although I'm not sure of his level of training. I would imagine that the weaver stance pulls ahead significantly when you're trained, and also when you're not staring at the target.

However that's beside the point, and two-weapon fighting is a trope in fantasy stuff, which is why it should be included. D&D isn't about simulating real life, it's about simulating works of fiction. Since that is a common thing in those I can't see why it shouldn't be included.
Pistol one handed ain't very accurate either, and the game actually does simulate the inaccuracy to a degree, giving you pretty severe penalties for firing two one handed weapons. Still, he hit with many of them, and that's what D&D cares about, how well you hit is done by rolling the damage die.

[AMFV]

Pistol one handed ain't very accurate either, and the game actually does simulate the inaccuracy to a degree, giving you pretty severe penalties for firing two one handed weapons. Still, he hit with many of them, and that's what D&D cares about, how well you hit is done by rolling the damage die.

Edit: Actually Olympic shooting is done one handed, at significantly greater ranges with significantly smaller targets. One handed shooting is much more accurate with a skilled shooter, and even that's not as good as two handed, which is the best tactical play.

[Ravens_cry]

Edit: Actually Olympic shooting is done one handed, at significantly greater ranges with significantly smaller targets. One handed shooting is much more accurate with a skilled shooter, and even that's not as good as two handed, which is the best tactical play.
Yes, and those are absolute specialists, dedicated to one sub-area of a sub speciality. In game terms, you'd call them min-maxers, munchkins.
The Hyneman obviously knows his way around firearms and has a more general level of skill. He also hasn't dedicated his life to it like Olympic pistol shooters.

[Khedrac]

People actually pay attention and use these rules?
Not only do we use them, but we have a 2-weapon fighter in the party. He's been grousing a lot - he got knocked out and dropped both weapons under a demon lord then we had to teleport out (so no, no-one could get his weapons back for him.
He managed to get some not-as-good replacements and guess what? He got stunned and dropped both weapons, again un-retrievable when we had to teleport out...
Actually he's just got the first pair back so is a happy bunny again :smallsmile:

And, actually, with Two-Weapon Fighting, you can retrieve/draw both weapons at once in the same action. And, by TWFing, you can also pick up two weapons at the same time ("Disarming" the ground with each hand).
Thank-you - I thought this rule existed but failed to find it on my quick check. The rest of my post still stands (unfortunately).

[AMFV]

Yes, and those are absolute specialists, dedicated to one sub-area of a sub speciality. In game terms, you'd call them min-maxers, munchkins.
The Hyneman obviously knows his way around firearms and has a more general level of skill. He also hasn't dedicated his life to it like Olympic pistol shooters.

Well I would say that if you were comparing him to a professional, not even a min-maxxer, somebody who has been to even one or two pistol ranges in the military that's a pretty poor showing. I mean it isn't his area of specialization. But in real life, dual wielding pistols is inefficient and not that effective a use of your time. You'll hit much more if you use that other hand to stabilize.

Again however in D&D it should be perfectly fine.

[Emperor Tippy]

1) That it requires a full attack. This is hands down the biggest problem with a TWF build and it practically forces you to pick up one of the methods of moving and still getting a full attack. Generally this means that Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian 1 is a required part of any TWF build that wants to be taken seriously.

2) That it is too feat intensive for something that is only moderately worth while in terms of damage when compared to other melee options.

3) That it doubles the investment into magical weapons that you have to make.

My changes to TWF would be as follows:

The Two Weapon Fighting feat allows you to make a second attack on a full attack action with any weapon that is in your offhand. If you duel wield light one handed weapons then you may make an extra attack every time you attack (defined as rolling an attack roll against an enemy). Any extra attacks made with this feat are made at -2 to AB.

Improved Two Weapon Fighting allows you to make an extra attack any time you duel wield one handed weapons (this is basically TWF but allows you to do things like duel wield bastard swords). If you duel wield light one handed weapons then you may choose to forgo an extra attack and instead make two attack rolls, if both hit then you automatically score a critical hit with one of your wielded weapons (you choice as to which), if one hits then it deals normal damage, if neither hits then you miss and loose any other attacks in this attack action (i.e. a full attack ends on a double miss). Any extra attacks made with this feat are made at -2 AB unless you duel wield light one handed weapons, in which case attacks are now made at -0 AB.

Greater Two Weapon Fighting allows you to choose to deal half damage on all attacks you make until you next turn, if you do so then you may make two attacks with your main hand and one attack with your off hand any time you make an attack roll until the start of your next turn.

I would also add this weapon enhancement (and probably a spell version as well, maybe also a feat version): Paired weapon. Paired weapon can be applied to any to identical (same material, same size, same weapon) magical weapons of +1 or better, when this is done one weapon must be chosen as the dominate weapon. From then on, so long as both weapons in a pair are simultaneously wielded by a single individual both weapons have all magical enhancements and enhancement bonuses (whether applied by spell or permanent enhancement) that are on the dominate weapon.

The item ability makes TWF slightly more expensive but only by a couple thousand GP, not a couple hundred thousand GP.

[Metahuman1]

An exstention of the problem with the feats.

You have to be taxed yet another extra feat to do TWF with one handed weapons in both hands, which usually isn't worth it power wise but its awesome style wise until you realize that that lost feat cost you the feat you needed to be effective enough doing it for it to be cool.

You also have to spend an extra feat to get a logical extra attack if you stick the opponent with both swords. Two Weapon Rend. That said, I might advise that this isn't necessarily super bad and might be worth the feat, it's been awhile since I looked at it though.

And on top of that, you have to invest heavily in Dex to meet just the basic feat requirements. So your stuck either increasing MAD or having to expend resources to find ways to drop other stats to keep it controlled.




Now, finally, these are not critically important but they are pet peeves of mine, there's no way to get the penalty to go away. I mean the basic -2 one, on the one for bigger off hand weapons or some such. Personal suggestion, the first feat get's the -2, the improved one get's it down to -1 as well as an extra off hand attack, and the last one removes it all together.

And you only get half Str mod on off hand attacks. Again, I think since the premise is your conditioning and training to be able to fight with both weapons, one in each hand, at equal levels of competency, it might be wise to just say that the first or second feat in the line mitigates this.

[Ravens_cry]

Well I would say that if you were comparing him to a professional, not even a min-maxxer, somebody who has been to even one or two pistol ranges in the military that's a pretty poor showing. I mean it isn't his area of specialization. But in real life, dual wielding pistols is inefficient and not that effective a use of your time. You'll hit much more if you use that other hand to stabilize.

Again however in D&D it should be perfectly fine.
No, but it's something that can be done, albeit at sharply reduced accuracy, which is something D&D models. I have a sneaky feeling we mostly agree with each other.:smalltongue:

[Captnq]

I got a work around.

Get infected with Warp Touch a few dozen times. Use fortune fate and Sheltered vitality to protect yourself from the negative side effects.

Mutate until you have a few extra limbs.

Now replace those limbs with Illithid Weapon Grafts using weapons of your choice. Each limb becomes a Natural Attack and can be used independantly for only a -5 to hit each.

Feat cost for multiple attacks: 0.

[Scow2]

Pistol one handed ain't very accurate either.

Actually, one-handed pistol shots are not meaningfully less accurate than most two-handed grips, especially not at the ranges that you're likely to fire a pistol. But, trying to coordinate two pistols WOULD be bad for accuracy.

[Eladrinblade]

Actually, one-handed pistol shots are not meaningfully less accurate than most two-handed grips, especially not at the ranges that you're likely to fire a pistol. But, trying to coordinate two pistols WOULD be bad for accuracy.

I think they were saying that pistols are very inaccurate compared to non-pistols, which they are. I only have one handgun that is what I would call "accurate", but all my rifles and shotguns are.

[Pex]

I disagree that cost of weapon enhancement is a problem. You'll find magic weapons in treasure hoards and pay nothing.

I disagree that lack of reach is a problem. It is a problem in terms of fighting an opponent with reach and having to suffer an AoO to attack, but not even every PC two-handed weapon user uses a reach weapon. You also aren't even fighting opponents with reach that often to worry about. Lack of reach is a disadvantage but not a problem to dismiss the tactic of two-weapon use.

As for damage output I think it's a matter of taste. Power Attack with two-handed weapons deals more consistent damage. Two-Weapon use provides more crit chances, doubles the benefit of attacking buffs, and is meta-game fun to imagine.

I do agree the problems lie in too many feats, too high a Dex requirement, and can only be used on a full attack. While not moving for a round is not a tragedy, you do have to move often enough it's noticeable you aren't using your main tactic.

[OldTrees1]

I disagree that lack of reach is a problem. It is a problem in terms of fighting an opponent with reach and having to suffer an AoO to attack, but not even every PC two-handed weapon user uses a reach weapon. You also aren't even fighting opponents with reach that often to worry about. Lack of reach is a disadvantage but not a problem to dismiss the tactic of two-weapon use.


I thought the lack of reach was referring to the reduced variety/abilities/tactics available. I have never selected a reach weapon as a counter to opponents with reach. I have selected a reach weapon in order to have a Zone of Control.

[Spuddles]

If you could move and get your full attack, I dont think TWF would be considered bad at all. Certainly competitive with THF.

[Scow2]

Well, you can get Reach by spending an EWP on a Kusari-Gama - A one-handed light Spiked chain.

[eggynack]

I disagree that cost of weapon enhancement is a problem. You'll find magic weapons in treasure hoards and pay nothing.
That's silly. The hoard contains a certain amount of stuff, dependent on what a given monster drops, and any hoard density that's made up of magic weapons is not made up of not that. You get nothing for having these things drop naturally for the most part, and you're not even considering the possibility that you won't get this drop at all. I mean, basing your weaponry on a single weapon drop is a pretty low chance proposition, but basing it on two seems even worse.


I disagree that lack of reach is a problem. It is a problem in terms of fighting an opponent with reach and having to suffer an AoO to attack, but not even every PC two-handed weapon user uses a reach weapon. You also aren't even fighting opponents with reach that often to worry about. Lack of reach is a disadvantage but not a problem to dismiss the tactic of two-weapon use.
Why wouldn't most PC's use a reach weapon? It's pretty low cost. As for dismissing the tactic, I'm not dismissing an entire tactic based on a lack of reach weapons. It's just another factor. If that were the only problem, TWF would be just fine. It's about this huge confluence of factors.

[Talya]

You also aren't even fighting opponents with reach that often to worry about.

I don't know if you noticed, but most monster manual entries beyond a certain CR are large sized or larger, with at least 10' reach.

That said, most two-handed weapon users stick with greatswords or greataxes, so you're right that most PCs don't use reach weapons.

[Kennisiou]

While the problems have been listed already, there have been few solutions listed that aren't just "DM fiat" so here's a bunch of RAW-leagal ways to make TWF a lot stronger.

1) Inspire Courage/Dragonfire Inspiration: Adds bonus to hit and bonus damage/damage dice to each hit, making TWF a very powerful archetype. One of the best parts about this is for it to function you don't need to be the bard. Just having one in the party is enough to let this function.

2) Skirmish/Swift Hunter: A source of bonus damage on classes that emphasize mobility, TWF is often considered flat out worse than ranged for purposes of swift hunting, but I think it's a bit more complicated than that. For example, if you're in need of both damage and something of a front line, TWF Swift hunter is going to provide battlefield control via attacks of opportunity a lot more easily than a ranged swift hunter will. Beyond that, using two weapons is super cool and being a Legolas wannabe is much less cool, so points there.

If you trade your animal companion for the solitary hunter feature from Dragon Magazine, you also get your favored enemy damage bonus to hit, meaning against your favored enemies you undo the accuracy loss AND get bonus damage to make your TWF strategy more effective.

3) Knowledge Devotion/1 level cleric dip: Knowledge devotion lets you get more damage on attacks against enemies who you can identify with knowledge checks. Additional bonus damage + additional attacks = best friends forever. A one level cleric dip can nab the knowledge devotion feat in favor of the knowledge domain.

4) Travel Devotion/1 level cleric dip: Travel devotion is a feat that lets you move as a swift action for a minute per activation once a day. You can expend 2 turning attempts to get another activation. A one level cleric dip can nab travel devotion in favor of the travel domain and gives you a turning pool to power it.

5) Maneuvers: Maneuvers, particularly warblade and swordsage maneuvers, contain a lot of mobility options and ways to add bonus damage to your attacks. Those are both things that TWF needs to function well. Pay attention to boosts and stances in particular.

6) Natural attacks: Pile natural attacks on top of your weapon attacks for even more hits. You'll get all of the bonus damage effects from bardsong/skirmish/knowledge devotion on your natural attacks. Good ones to gain are bite attacks, slam attacks, tentacle attacks, claw attacks from additional grown arms -- anything that doesn't require you to take your hands off of your weapons.

7) Pounce/1 level Spirit Lion Totem Whirling Frenzy Barbarian dip: Pounce lets you charge and still make a full attack, but is problematic compared to other mobility options via maneuvers/travel devotion in that it's a lot more limited. Charging requires straight line travel, passable terrain, and while it does add a bonus to damage on all attacks (which TWF loves) it comes with the problem of losing some AC. The one level dip is the most efficient way to gain pounce, but changing shape, being a catfolk, or DM fiat magic items or feats can get it as well. Use Unearthed Arcana's Whirling Frenzy in place of Barb rage because its extra attack synergizes better with TWF than the standard rage features and it makes up for its on -2 penalty to hit with +4 str.

8) Swashbuckler: Yeah, Swashbuckler. It's a good class for TWF. It gets int to damage, weapon finesse, and can nab acrobatic charge. TWF is one of the few times where it may not be a bad idea to take more than three levels of swashbuckler, instead going the full seven for acrobatic charge. There are other, often better ways to accomplish getting more flexible charging mechanics, but if you're a high-int, high-dex low str build swashbuckler has a lot of things you care about. Pair it up with the one level of Lion Totem Barbarian and knowledge devotion and you get lots of attacks and a bunch of bonus damage types.

9) Sneak Attack: Generally inferior to Skirmish in my opinion because it's harder to force to happen, but the damage is greater. I wouldn't prioritize this, but finding ways to nab a bit of sneak attack (like Assassin Stance) is usually not a bad idea for TWF builds.

10) Armor Spikes: Listed last because by RAW its legality is shaky. Use a two handed weapon as your "main hand" attack and armor spikes as your "off hand." This allows you to THF optimize on a TWF build with power attack and it's debatable by RAW if you even receive TWF penalties if you aren't actually holding two weapons in your hand.

TWF is not a bad archetype strictly speaking, it's just not an archetype that's easy to optimize out of the box and even optimized it occasionally falls short of other melee strategies like whole-hog natural attacking or THF. There are lots of ways to make it better, though, especially if the party is willing to work with you on it or just naturally has shaped in a way to accommodate it. If you've got a friend going bard, TWF as a swift hunter or swashbuckler/warblade/whilring frenzy barb 1 is a fine way to synergize and get some heavy damage out.

[Grayson01]

Full strength on both attacks works (5e did this as the "Two Weapon Combat Style", but requires two light weapons until you take the TWFing feat.


How about merely allowing Power Attack to apply to Light weapons? Why are you giving TWFers EVEN MORE damage from power attack than a Two-handed user?

Wat.

I am not giving TWFs more damage then then a THW fighter it's the same but the TWF has 2 weapons and has a bigger tottal - (-7or-9 for the +10 damage as apposed to the -5 for +10) and has a higher feat tax.

And Strong Two Weapon Fighter is just another feat but gives your main hand 1.5 your strength Bonus. What's you question?

[Scow2]

I am not giving TWFs more damage then then a THW fighter it's the same but the TWF has 2 weapons and has a bigger tottal - (-7or-9 for the +10 damage as apposed to the -5 for +10) and has a higher feat tax.

And Strong Two Weapon Fighter is just another feat but gives your main hand 1.5 your strength Bonus. What's you question?When you start adding them together with all these feats. A Two-handed fighter is dealing 1.5xSTR damage on each attack-cycle he gets here (2x if he's an Exotic Weapon Master with a d10 weapon). A TWFer is getting 2.5xSTR on each attack combo. A THFer's exchanging accuracy at a -1/+2 rate unless Charging. The TWFer is exchanging at a -1/+4 rate. The TWFer has greater base damage (1d6+1d8, against 1d10, 1d12, or 1d6+1d6) as well... and if he has Pounce, it's a -1/+8 exchange per iterative attack.


2) Skirmish/Swift Hunter: A source of bonus damage on classes that emphasize mobility, TWF is often considered flat out worse than ranged for purposes of swift hunting, but I think it's a bit more complicated than that. For example, if you're in need of both damage and something of a front line, TWF Swift hunter is going to provide battlefield control via attacks of opportunity a lot more easily than a ranged swift hunter will. Beyond that, using two weapons is super cool and being a Legolas wannabe is much less cool, so points there.If you move+attack, you can't TWF, and AoOs don't give a rat's ass how many weapons you're wielding. It's better to go Archer Combat Style with Melee/Two-handed main feats for a flexible build. Most of your attacks here involve Move+Attacking, which wastes the entire point of TWFing.

[Greenish]

If you move+attack, you can't TWF, and AoOs don't give a rat's ass how many weapons you're wielding. It's better to go Archer Combat Style with Melee/Two-handed main feats for a flexible build. Most of your attacks here involve Move+Attacking, which wastes the entire point of TWFing.If you can get the move+full attack (which you should aim for anyway), Swift Hunter's skirmish is one of the more reliable sources of extra damage this side of Power Attack.

For AoO, I quite like Double Hit, even though that's another feat to burn.


I'm surprised Kennisiou brought up both Swashbuckler and Sneak Attack, without giving a shout to Swift Hunter's favourite cousin, Daring Outlaw.

[AMFV]

No, but it's something that can be done, albeit at sharply reduced accuracy, which is something D&D models. I have a sneaky feeling we mostly agree with each other.:smalltongue:

Probably but I'm sick and at home without much to do other than argue with civilians over weapons. My argument would be that it shouldn't have those penalties. Because we're not simulating real combat, not even close, we're simulating fantasy combat. They should have different weapon styles with different workable feats, like Sword and Board should have advantages and disadvantages, but it should not be clearly crappier than any other option (in my humble opinion), I feel the same way about TWF. Although I suspect that may be something you agree with.

[Pex]

That's silly. The hoard contains a certain amount of stuff, dependent on what a given monster drops, and any hoard density that's made up of magic weapons is not made up of not that. You get nothing for having these things drop naturally for the most part, and you're not even considering the possibility that you won't get this drop at all. I mean, basing your weaponry on a single weapon drop is a pretty low chance proposition, but basing it on two seems even worse.


Why wouldn't most PC's use a reach weapon? It's pretty low cost. As for dismissing the tactic, I'm not dismissing an entire tactic based on a lack of reach weapons. It's just another factor. If that were the only problem, TWF would be just fine. It's about this huge confluence of factors.

There was a thread recently asking why people dislike magic marts. In many campaigns you can't just buy what you want. Finding magic weapons in treasure hoards is standard. What you probably won't get is your own customized to everything you exactly want weapon without asking the DM to put it in a treasure hoard. Then again, in one of my group's campaigns one DM allows each of us an item we can customize to our heart's content as we gain levels as a house rule.

Some players just like to wield great swords and great axes. Some players like just to deal damage not bothering with tripping or disarming or bull rushing or other maneuvers.

[Kennisiou]

If you can get the move+full attack (which you should aim for anyway), Swift Hunter's skirmish is one of the more reliable sources of extra damage this side of Power Attack.

For AoO, I quite like Double Hit, even though that's another feat to burn.


I'm surprised Kennisiou brought up both Swashbuckler and Sneak Attack, without giving a shout to Swift Hunter's favourite cousin, Daring Outlaw.

Yeah, exactly. If you're swift hunting as an archer without a means of swift mobility you're not necessarily doing it wrong, you're just doing it worse than if you'd gained swift movement. The only thing about that TWF changes is that if you do it without a means of swift movement/full attack on charge you just flat out can't do it.

Also, I'm personally not a fan of daring outlaw. I find rogue and swashbuckler by themselves are both underwhelming and combining them doesn't make up for it enough. Rogue's medium BaB and d6 hitdie just do not a frontline fighter make. Swashbuckler 7/Whirling Frenzy Lion Totem Barbarian to go into swordsage or warblade is a lot better for TWF. In fact, I'd generally say that rogues themselves are not great for TWF, which is why I called out sneak attacks in general and not rogues specifically. Thug fighter and sneak attacking prestige classes, as well as assassin stance, are just much better ways to get sneak attacks for a two weapon fighting build. That said, if you were already going to go rogue or daring outlaw, then using your spare feats to get some TWF going is definitely not a bad idea. It seems better to me to go for swordsage/warblade instead, still, but if you're committed to not doing that then you could do worse for a daring outlaw than nabbing some TWF.

[AMFV]

I'd actually be fine with splitting up the weapons styles this way although it would take a reworking of several feats.

Two-Weapon Fighting: High Damage would take on the same role as uberchargers and power attackers have today at this point. Should probably involve full attacks and some way to gain acrobatic charge since that fits stylistically.

Two-Handed: Would probably include ways to affect status conditions or trip, using what is usually seen with two-weapon fighting in movies. Ergo a big strike might temporarily daze an opponent. So it would fill the battlefield control part that fighters do occasionally fill, it might even include a feat to gain reach (perfectly reasonable as a feat since the ones from BoVD do that, and it would remove the ridiculous evil clause)

Sword And Board: Would include the ability to shrug off or resist status effects almost completely. Would potentially include debuffs on enemies that attack your friends over you, or try to bypass you. Would help shut down different aspects of the game, possibly to include certain ranged attacks (adding concealment or whatnot).

If this is kind of what people would appreciate I might homebrew up something for it, although I haven't done anything like that before, this sounds like it would simulate what we see in fantasy fiction and film to me at least. How does this sort of solution strike people?

[Greenish]

Rogue's medium BaB and d6 hitdie just do not a frontline fighter make.Most Daring Outlaw builds lose one point of BAB at most, and the reason to go to Swashbuckler is precisely that: more sturdy chassis. Obviously martial adepts are better, but then, why bother messing with Swashbuckler at all (no, I'm not convinced Acrobatic Charge is worth all those levels)?


Thug fighter and sneak attacking prestige classes, as well as assassin stance, are just much better ways to get sneak attacks for a two weapon fighting build.Thug fighter doesn't even get sneak attack*, and most SA PrCs are fairly poor and/or require jumping through too many hoops. Assassin's Stance is nice but comes online somewhat late if you don't take a bunch of swordsage levels.

*You're thinking of sneak attack fighter. Thug is the one that loses a feat and armour proficiencies for a bit more skills. Even combining the two is fairly horrible class; I'd much rather take a few levels in rogue which gets loads of skills and class features like Evasion.

[Kennisiou]

Most Daring Outlaw builds lose one point of BAB at most, and the reason to go to Swashbuckler is precisely that: more sturdy chassis. Obviously martial adepts are better, but then, why bother messing with Swashbuckler at all (no, I'm not convinced Acrobatic Charge is worth all those levels)?

Honestly, 7 levels to get acrobatic charge is definitely stretching it even on a TWF build. 3 levels swashbuckler on a TWF Warblade with knowledge devotion and travel devotion is probably better. I was mostly listing options, not trying to list the best ones, and since that was the case you're right that I definitely should've put daring outlaw in, even if I'm not sure if it's better than 7 swashbuckler levels 1 barb level then initiator levels (which is still worse than just 3 swashbuckler levels 1 barb level then initiator levels).

For real, couldn't they have just given swashbuckler, like, uncanny dodge at 2-3, evasion at 4, and improved uncanny dodge at 7? And made their dodge bonus and grace features not suck? And maybe given them more skill points and a better class skill list while we're at it?


Thug fighter doesn't even get sneak attack*, and most SA PrCs are fairly poor and/or require jumping through too many hoops. Assassin's Stance is nice but comes online somewhat late if you don't take a bunch of swordsage levels.

*You're thinking of sneak attack fighter. Thug is the one that loses a feat and armour proficiencies for a bit more skills. Even combining the two is fairly horrible class; I'd much rather take a few levels in rogue which gets loads of skills and class features like Evasion.

Uuugh yeah, sneak attack fighter =/= thug fighter. Whoops. This is what happens to a person who abandons fighter and rogue classes almost entirely in favor of martial adepts. You just forget everything.

That said, I was under the impression that there were several good PrCs that give sneak attack, like Dread Commando and Assassin (although I now see Dread Commando is Sudden Strike, which is like if sneak attack didn't proc on flanking... still a good class, but not sneak attack strictly speaking).

Also, remember, non-adept classes progress your learning by half of an adept class and assassin stance is only a level 3 stance (meaning 5 initiator levels are required). If you dip one level of swordsage at level nine you can nab the prereqs and assassin stance all in one level AND qualify for the dex-to-damage feat whose name I never remember as well, not a bad use of your ninth level on some TWF builds. In general unless you really need that level for something else like pounce, swift movement, or skirmish progression it's not a bad level.

[Greenish]

even if I'm not sure if it's better than 7 swashbuckler levels 1 barb level then initiator levelsSure it is. Go rogue4/swash3/barb1/initiator, you lose one BAB and a few HP (compared to that build), but you gain loads of skills and skill points (go Able Learner while at it) so you can do things other than stab people. Also Evasion is very nice, and rogue 4 can get the ACF to sneak attack normally immune critters.


That said, I was under the impression that there were several good PrCs that give sneak attack, like Dread Commando and Assassin (although I now see Dread Commando is Sudden Strike, which is like if sneak attack didn't proc on flanking... still a good class, but not sneak attack strictly speaking).Dread Commando is pretty meh, especially with the awful prerequisites. Assassin is mostly good due to the casting, which you really don't get much if you just dip for SA.


Also, remember, non-adept classes progress your learning by half of an adept class and assassin stance is only a level 3 stance (meaning 5 initiator levels are required).Go teach your grandmother how to suck eggs. :smalltongue:


If you dip one level of swordsage at level nineThat's what I meant by quite late.

the dex-to-damage feat whose name I never remember as well[/QUOTE]Shadow Blade. And obviously martial adepts are the most versatile fighting men.

[Pickford]

ZeroSpace9000:

I've recently had some ideas on how to make dual-wielding a generally more attractive option, but in the interests of thorough research, I figured I should see what is and isn't in need of fixing.

So what are the problems with TWF? Please note, I'm not a new player wondering what the deal is, I'm just seeking out feedback on the matter.

Depends on what you mean by TWF. Are you referring to the style, or the feat tree?

There's less wrong with both than you might think.

Light and one-handed weapons provide 1xstr mh and +.5xstr oh, which is equal to the +1.5xstr bonus of a 2h weapon.
TWF hits and crits more often than 2h or sword and board fighting. (it will hit 64% of the time against a target the 2h and 1h users only hit 50% of the time against, and crit 10% vs their 5%, all things being equal)

So, baseline (no feats at all) TWF is straight superior to using a 2h weapon in terms of hit percentage and critical hit percentages. The problem with the TWF feat tree is the dexterity requirements. Getting all the basic ones requires an eventual Dex of 19 (achievable via 13 starting dex and a +6 item, so not that big a deal, but it's still ~36k that you would have to invest). Focusing on something other than strength generally detracts from what is otherwise the sole focus of a martial character, str which, usually, translates into more damage.

So, TWF is probably better served by the use of weapon finesse and a focus purely on high dex (hitting at all) which will fuel defense and hitting at all, rather than str. It also depends on how many feats you have to play around with.

Scow2:

And, by TWFing, you can also pick up two weapons at the same time ("Disarming" the ground with each hand).

You forgot to put this in blue.

AMFV: PHB II has feats for each of the damage types (i.e. a bludgeoning one that sickens, etc...)

[eggynack]

Light and one-handed weapons provide 1xstr mh and +.5xstr oh, which is equal to the +1.5xstr bonus of a 2h weapon.
TWF hits and crits more often than 2h or sword and board fighting. (it will hit 64% of the time against a target the 2h and 1h users only hit 50% of the time against, and crit 10% vs their 5%, all things being equal)
These two chunks of math kinda cancel each other out. If one hit with the one handed weapon and one hit with the light weapon provides you with the total strength bonus of the two handed weapon, then you need to hit with both weapons to equal the damage of one THF hit. Getting in both hits just gets you to parity, rather than to an amount of damage in excess of what THF provides. Since you're operating at a penalty, and need to up your dexterity, you're unlikely to get enough hits for it to balance out, and your strength bonus is likely to be less than the THF guy's anyway.


So, baseline (no feats at all) TWF is straight superior to using a 2h weapon in terms of hit percentage and critical hit percentages.
Thus, continuing from the last point, though these two statements are possibly true, they are also rather meaningless. You need hits per round and damage per hit, rather than just one or the other. It is in combination that TWF fails. Also, if we're talking baseline, as in no feats at all, then you don't have the feat two weapon fighting, and your hits/round is likely pretty bad. I don't know the exact math of that situation, so you still might be getting slightly more hits, but by that point you're pretty far behind a guy just whacking his enemies with a guisarme.

[EugeneVoid]

Just throwing this out here:

Assuming both hit 50% of the time

Assuming the standard 2HW to attack with: Greatsword
2d6+9 (Assuming 22 strength [easy as hell to get])
.45 (16)+.05(32) = 8.8

40% hit with TWF, 2 attacks
I've seen kukri most used by two-weapon fighters, because of crit-fishing, but we'll use a better example here: Shortsword

1d6+6
.36(9.5)+.04(19)=4.18
1d6+3
.36(6.5)+.04(13)= 2.86
The altogether damage would be ~7.04

This has 5 things in TWF's favor
1. TWF has the two-weapon fighting feat
2. The THF has no feats
3. Both are full attacking with no iteratives (because iteratives are better for THF)
4. Ignores the drastic cost of having massive strength in a two-weapon build, because of the dex requirements, and AC, etc, etc
5. Power Attack.
~6. I'm sure there are plenty more.

TWF's only saving grace is that (as I learned in 4th edition) it applies static modifiers twice. Things like DFI and sneak attack. Blood in the water is also very tasty with Two-Weapon Fighter. And we can't forget Revenant Blade.

By the way, here is the crit analysis.
THF will critical threat 5% of the time and 5% they will crit (assuming a 50% hit)
TWF will critically threat (assuming a 19-20)
Once: 10.8% of the time, 7.2% crits
Twice: .36% of the time, Critting once .48% of the time and critting twice .16% of the time.

So the actual ratio of crits is something like:
5|5

11.6|7.68, .16% or 11.6|7.84 though critting twice is far more beautiful than critting once.

Because auto-hits are pretty meh, since you've already rolled a ~20 it boils down to 5:7.84, which is pretty measly.

Accuracy however is about right.
Hits once 48% of the time, hits twice 16% of the time, misses 36% of the time.

Addendum: I'm 16, so my math might be off.

[Sayt]

I do a thing I think might actually make double weapons slightly worth it

Double Slice: Revised [Pathfinder]
Add your Strength bonus to damage rolls made with your off-hand weapon. When two-weapon fighting with a Double Weapon, add your full 1-½ Strength bonus to your damage rolls with On-Hand attacks.

Greater Double Slice: New Feat
Prerequisite: Str 15, Dex 15, Two-Weapon Fighting, Proficiency with a double weapon, Double Slice.
When fighting with a double weapon, you may add your full 1-½ Strength modifier on all attacks made by this weapon. Can be taken as two weapon style feat by Rangers at Ranger 6

Further more, I roll ITWF and GTWF into the two weapon fighting, and you may make off-hand attacks equal to the number of on-hand attacks, including bonus attacks from high BAB, haste, etc.

Don't have a good answer to the mobility issues though.

[Pickford]

Just throwing this out here:

Assuming both hit 50% of the time

Assuming the standard 2HW to attack with: Greatsword
2d6+9 (Assuming 22 strength [easy as hell to get])
.45 (16)+.05(32) = 8.8

40% hit with TWF, 2 attacks
I've seen kukri most used by two-weapon fighters, because of crit-fishing, but we'll use a better example here: Shortsword

1d6+6
.36(9.5)+.04(19)=4.18
1d6+3
.36(6.5)+.04(13)= 2.86
The altogether damage would be ~7.04

No logical reason exists for not using a one-handed weapon in the main hand. Both weapons being light provides no benefit. So the damage would be:
1d8 + 6
.30 (10.5) + .10 (21) = 5.25 (Longsword)
or
1d8 + 6
.35 (10.5) + .05 (31.5) = 5.25 (Battleaxe)
for a total of 8.175

[AMFV]

No logical reason exists for not using a one-handed weapon in the main hand. Both weapons being light provides no benefit. So the damage would be:
1d8 + 6
.30 (10.5) + .10 (21) = 5.25 (Longsword)
or
1d8 + 6
.35 (10.5) + .05 (31.5) = 5.25 (Battleaxe)
for a total of 8.175

And you're still losing out, unless 8.8 is now greater than 8.175. And you've paid feats, you've paid twice as much for weapons, so I'd say that's a lose-lose-lose scenario.

[eggynack]

No logical reason exists for not using a one-handed weapon in the main hand.
The logical reason presents itself when you get into the actual builds, instead of this theory-crafting. TWF and weapon finesse tend to go well together, and a battleaxe is not finessable. Also, why does it look like you're wielding a longsword and a battleaxe? At least one of the weapons does need to be light. Also, one of those weapons needs to be in your offhand, so the strength damage on that one would be three. In any case, even in this skewed case, the THF build appears to reign supreme, so the comparison ends up in THF's favor.

[Gwendol]

Eggynack, Pickford gave two examples of a main hand weapon. The off-hand is still light (and presumably a kukri or shortsword, as per the previous example).

[Pickford]

And you're still losing out, unless 8.8 is now greater than 8.175. And you've paid feats, you've paid twice as much for weapons, so I'd say that's a lose-lose-lose scenario.

A longsword costs 15gp, a greatsword costs 50gp. I could buy 3 longswords and it would still be cheaper.

Gwendol: Correct.

[TypoNinja]

Don't have a good answer to the mobility issues though.

I feel like there are enough gear based solutions to mobility, or feat powered options (travel devotion), that you can make viable characters based augmented movement options. Hell there are even spells available. I've had great fun using Slide on a Scout to trigger Skirmish.

You don't get to do it all the time like you would if you picked up pounce, (unless you spend a lot of cash and swap out items as the charges deplete), but in my experience they've still been quite effective.


A longsword costs 15gp, a greatsword costs 50gp. I could buy 3 longswords and it would still be cheaper.


Mundane weapon cost is irrelevant, the point is TWF are forced to enchant two sets of weapons. A TWF has a pair of +7 weapons compared to a THF's +10 weapon at similar expenditures.

[eggynack]

Eggynack, Pickford gave two examples of a main hand weapon. The off-hand is still light (and presumably a kukri or shortsword, as per the previous example).
Ah. That makes significantly more sense. Anyways, two of the points I've made still stand. The damage still comes up higher on the THF side of things, despite several advantages afforded to the TWF guy, and there is a reasonable reason to use two light weapons. or perhaps a light weapon and a rapier.

[Gwendol]

The rapier is finessable, but not light, as is the spiked chain.

So, rapier/handaxe is valid as is spiked chain/spiked gauntlet

The "problem" with going this route is if you don't get bonus feats, you have to take both weapon finesse, and TWF just to make it work.

Ranger is attractive since it removes the DEX requirement (sort of) even though the benefit only works in medium armor, which means pumping DEX anyway to maintain AC, at least until the mithral full plate is affordable.

To me the greatest disadvantage of TWF is the dex requirement: it forces the character to split abilities and it is at disadvantage with practically all other melee styles from the start due to feat requirements.

Finally, only being able to use both on a full attack is inane and really the straw that breaks the camel's back.

[Sayt]

I feel like there are enough gear based solutions to mobility, or feat powered options (travel devotion), that you can make viable characters based augmented movement options. Hell there are even spells available. I've had great fun using Slide on a Scout to trigger Skirmish.

Pathfinder has the quickrunner's shirt and the Jaunt boots, but those aren't amazing. (Jaunt boots are 3/day 15' five foot steps, and quickrunner's is 1/day to move up to your speed as a swift. But yeah, In a 3.p game, as a TWF I'd probably buy the wizard a wand of slide, or something.

[AMFV]

A longsword costs 15gp, a greatsword costs 50gp. I could buy 3 longswords and it would still be cheaper.

Gwendol: Correct.

However you've spent a feat, and even at first level that's worth a lot more than 50gp, try asking any optimizer how many feats they would take if they could buy feats for 50gp.

[Emperor Tippy]

If you are going TWF then you only need a moderate Strength while you want Dex and Int maxed.

Rogue 1/ Factotum 3/ Swordsage 2/ Swashbuckler 3/ Invisible Fist Decisive Strike Marital Monk 2/ Mindbender 1/ Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian 1/ Fighter 6

Feats: Craven, Shadow Blade, Kung Fu Genius, Mindsight, the TWF line, Snap Kick, and lots of Font of Inspiration. Grab Weapon Supremacy from Martial Monk

On a sneak attack you will be getting +HD, + Int, +Int, +Dex, +Str. Drop the +HD for non sneak attacks.

Max Int and Dex for 34/28 or 36/30 (if you go Gray Elf) with 20 Strength and you are rocking +38 damage just from that on every attack. Throw on a power attack for a ton as Cunning Insight along with rolling Dex on your attack roll and using a +5 Weapon is getting you up to +28 on your attack roll. You can easily be hitting +55-60 damage on every attack and still hitting with two to three attacks (or even more) per turn.

It still doesn't match what other builds (or even what fully optimized TWF) can do but it is good enough to keep up with Mid Op high level play and is playable from level 1 to level 20 while also giving you numerous other functions so that you are at least somewhat useful outside of direct combat.

If you are a human, grab Able Learner and you can skill monkey with the best of them. If you are a Gray Elf then grab Faerie Mysteries Initiate and you have more HP than anything else around. Especially if you throw on Necropolitan, which you should be doing pretty much every time with either Gray Elf or Human.

[TypoNinja]

Pathfinder has the quickrunner's shirt and the Jaunt boots, but those aren't amazing. (Jaunt boots are 3/day 15' five foot steps, and quickrunner's is 1/day to move up to your speed as a swift. But yeah, In a 3.p game, as a TWF I'd probably buy the wizard a wand of slide, or something.

Anklet of Translocation, Chronocharm of the Horizon Walker, Belt of Battle. Also there's a couple of sets of boots who's name escapes me. The options are there if you go digging.

[Gwendol]

If you are going TWF then you only need a moderate Strength while you want Dex and Int maxed.

Rogue 1/ Factotum 3/ Swordsage 2/ Swashbuckler 3/ Invisible Fist Decisive Strike Marital Monk 2/ Mindbender 1/ Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian 1/ Fighter 6

Feats: Craven, Shadow Blade, Kung Fu Genius, Mindsight, the TWF line, Snap Kick, and lots of Font of Inspiration. Grab Weapon Supremacy from Martial Monk



I personally prefer a simpler Dark human rogue 3/Swashbuckler X using penetrating strike ACF, craven, and daring outlaw. Knowledge devotion + collector of stories skill trick for extra damage.

[Greenish]

Rogue 1/ Factotum 3/ Swordsage 2/ Swashbuckler 3/ Invisible Fist Decisive Strike Marital Monk 2/ Mindbender 1/ Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian 1/ Fighter 6What if you prefer to stay single?


I personally prefer a simpler Dark human rogue 3/Swashbuckler X using penetrating strike ACF, craven, and daring outlaw.Human feats are nice, but Changeling rogue sub levels (especially the first one) are so tempting. Not directly related to TWF, granted.

[Pickford]

Ah. That makes significantly more sense. Anyways, two of the points I've made still stand. The damage still comes up higher on the THF side of things, despite several advantages afforded to the TWF guy, and there is a reasonable reason to use two light weapons. or perhaps a light weapon and a rapier.

Yeah, but you also have to account for the defense. The TWF is likely to have a higher defense than the THF, and if working with things like poisons than the increased hit rate is more valuable than the straight damage output. (Able to pick up shield bonuses)

[OldTrees1]

Yeah, but you also have to account for the defense. The TWF is likely to have a higher defense than the THF, and if working with things like poisons than the increased hit rate is more valuable than the straight damage output. (Able to pick up shield bonuses)

Light Armor + Dex and Armor without Dex tend to be equal in AC except for the small cost difference (~1500gp for no Dex)

Everyone gets Shield bonuses via animated shields. (Two Weapon Defense feats are a joke)

[AMFV]

Yeah, but you also have to account for the defense. The TWF is likely to have a higher defense than the THF, and if working with things like poisons than the increased hit rate is more valuable than the straight damage output. (Able to pick up shield bonuses)

Why would the TWF have a higher defense? I mean they could buff it by a single point... but other than that, there's no reason for them to have a higher defense, no benefit that grants that. Since the THF can use heavier armor without penalty. So that's a wash at best.

[eggynack]

Yeah, but you also have to account for the defense. The TWF is likely to have a higher defense than the THF, and if working with things like poisons than the increased hit rate is more valuable than the straight damage output. (Able to pick up shield bonuses)
Not really. I mean, assuming heavy armor, the two characters would come out at basically the exact same AC. Even were that not the case, your damage is lower assuming equal stats, so I can just set the stats equal, and that'd mitigate any arbitrary AC bonus you manage to construct.

[EugeneVoid]

I hate arguing on the internet with anyone, but the answer is no...
You will have a significantly lower AC (though AC matters in the high-end levels) if you dual-wield and plan to deal your damage from strength alone.

Full Plate will trump any dexterity based build.

The only way to have comparable damage/AC would be to have Finesse, TWF, and some form of Precision damage, or a chunk of damage dice.

Which limits more options.

Overall, THF has been proven to be better (in general), though TWF has special niches and is pretty badass.

The thing with THF is that you have to have ~15 dex to pick TWF, and then Balanced Gloves (or whatever) for the GTWF.

15 dex is a fairly costly investment until later in the game when you can pick up tomes/wishes.

That's my view on it, though, like I said, the opposing side (including me) on the internet is like a file. It will not bend, at most, break.


No logical reason exists for not using a one-handed weapon in the main hand. Both weapons being light provides no benefit. So the damage would be:
1d8 + 6
.30 (10.5) + .10 (21) = 5.25 (Longsword)
or
1d8 + 6
.35 (10.5) + .05 (31.5) = 5.25 (Battleaxe)
for a total of 8.175

The battle axe isn't light, so more attack penalties.
You only apply .5 strength to damage with the offhand.
Your critical threat chance is not the same as critical hit.

Ps. Whatev... tho... just a math nerd here.

[Pickford]

Why would the TWF have a higher defense? I mean they could buff it by a single point... but other than that, there's no reason for them to have a higher defense, no benefit that grants that. Since the THF can use heavier armor without penalty. So that's a wash at best.

They can actually buff it by 3 points (Imp and Gr TWD), and when fighting defensively that doubles to +6, +2 for fighting defensively, so +8 total, and the higher dex character can purchase cheaper, lighter, armor for the exact same total bonus (higher actually if mithril and the THF is not putting anything in dex)

I think the styles simply lend themselves to different stat arrangements. There's not a really compelling reason for a THF to pump their dex.

Oldtrees1, an animated shield is at least 9k, so that's not coming online until at least level 6. And then basically nothing else the THF is carrying would be magical which puts them substantially behind. I'd say spending a feat is well worth it, from the practical point of view of having the play the character prior high levels just littered with loot.

eggynack: THF can't get the TWD feats, so absent an animated shield (which I just pointed out is considerably too expensive until well after 6th level).

EugeneVoid: You made the same error as eggynack, the Battleaxe is an 'or' option, it's not being wielded in the Off hand, it's in the main hand.

[eggynack]

eggynack: THF can't get the TWD feats, so absent an animated shield (which I just pointed out is considerably too expensive until well after 6th level).

Thank Pelor for that. Two weapon defense is an absolutely horrific line of feats. You're talking about adding TWF's answer to dodge onto a rather feat intensive build, and acting like it's some big advantage to your position. It's not. Seriously, AC isn't all that great, and pumping feats into minor boosts to it is about as bad as it gets. You can do that, and I'm going to just keep adding actually good feats to the THF build.

[Scow2]

ZeroSpace9000:


Depends on what you mean by TWF. Are you referring to the style, or the feat tree?

There's less wrong with both than you might think.

Light and one-handed weapons provide 1xstr mh and +.5xstr oh, which is equal to the +1.5xstr bonus of a 2h weapon.
TWF hits and crits more often than 2h or sword and board fighting. (it will hit 64% of the time against a target the 2h and 1h users only hit 50% of the time against, and crit 10% vs their 5%, all things being equal)Actually, the TWFer hits at a lower rate than the THFer due to the -2 Attack penalty. The TWFer only deals the same damage as the THFer if he hits with both attacks. Within a short period of time (one or two rounds), the TWFer's damage output is more predictable than the THFer's, but in the long run the TWFer gets twice as many attacks as the THFer, but also misses twice as often, and alternates weapons.


So, baseline (no feats at all) TWF is straight superior to using a 2h weapon in terms of hit percentage and critical hit percentages. The problem with the TWF feat tree is the dexterity requirements. Getting all the basic ones requires an eventual Dex of 19 (achievable via 13 starting dex and a +6 item, so not that big a deal, but it's still ~36k that you would have to invest). Focusing on something other than strength generally detracts from what is otherwise the sole focus of a martial character, str which, usually, translates into more damage.

So, TWF is probably better served by the use of weapon finesse and a focus purely on high dex (hitting at all) which will fuel defense and hitting at all, rather than str. It also depends on how many feats you have to play around with.But not investing in STR forces you to use Light weapons (Or a light weapon+rapier), and dramatically lowers damage output.


Scow2:
You forgot to put this in blue.Why should I have? From a practical standpoint, picking up two weapons with two separate hands does not take appreciably greater time, at least if you're ambidextrous and capable of using your hands completely independently in the way a TWFer can. The part in parenthesis was for the benefit of anal-retentive RAWtards/cheesmunchkins.


A longsword costs 15gp, a greatsword costs 50gp. I could buy 3 longswords and it would still be cheaper.
At level 1. But Two Masterwork longswords cost 630 GP, while a masterwork Greatsword costs 350 GP, being almost half the price. And the differences get bigger from there (Though, in your defense, magic effects that deal damage do actually pay off, sort of - A +1 Flaming Greatsword only does +1d6+1 damage, while two +1 Flaming Short Swords do +2d6+2, and are cheaper than a +2 Flaming Shocking Greatsword). However, the attack bonuses don't really pay off because of how the game's Checks work.

[OldTrees1]

@Pickford
Animated Shield comes online at 9th or later (25% of WBL) so only TWD and ITWD can be taken sooner.

At 6th-8th level (After ITWD is available but before Animated Shield) you can get +2 AC for 2 feats or -4 Atk & +6 AC for 2 feats.

Now at those levels THF is in +2 Fullplate[11 Armor+Dex, 5500gp] while TWF is in +1 Mithral Breastplate[11 Armor+Dex, 5200gp]

So TWF has the option to spend 2 feats in order to get a mere +2AC or -4Atk & +6AC.

I am not convinced that TWD is worth a feat slot.

[Pickford]

Thank Pelor for that. Two weapon defense is an absolutely horrific line of feats. You're talking about adding TWF's answer to dodge onto a rather feat intensive build, and acting like it's some big advantage to your position. It's not. Seriously, AC isn't all that great, and pumping feats into minor boosts to it is about as bad as it gets. You can do that, and I'm going to just keep adding actually good feats to the THF build.

Er no, they can still get dodge, in fact by qualifying for any of the TWF line you automatically qualify for dodge too, it's how TWF deals with not carrying a shield (though you could pick up improved buckler defense if you prefer that way)

You can also pick up two weapon rend to emulate a 4th attack which lands as long as the MH hits once and the OH hits once.

Each point of AC (once an attack is not guaranteed to land on anything but a 1, obviously) translates into 5% less damage taken.

Scow2: Each attack has a 40% hit chance, combined that's 64% hit chance per round vs the 50% of the THF.

[eggynack]

I am not convinced that TWD is worth a feat slot.
Understatement of the century right there. I mean, just look at it. It's a feat that raises AC, and not even by so much that you can practically ignore the stat with it by your side. It's a marginal increase to a marginal piece of the game, and you're spending a feat on it. It's just bad. You're boosting AC by inches while the THF guy is getting power attack, or shock trooper, or even cleave. There's just no comparison.

[Pickford]

Understatement of the century right there. I mean, just look at it. It's a feat that raises AC, and not even by so much that you can practically ignore the stat with it by your side. It's a marginal increase to a marginal piece of the game, and you're spending a feat on it. It's just bad. You're boosting AC by inches while the THF guy is getting power attack, or shock trooper, or even cleave. There's just no comparison.

And power attack doesn't actually do anything unless you drop your chance to hit.

[eggynack]

Er no, they can still get dodge, in fact by qualifying for any of the TWF line you automatically qualify for dodge too, it's how TWF deals with not carrying a shield (though you could pick up improved buckler defense if you prefer that way)

You can also pick up two weapon rend to emulate a 4th attack which lands as long as the MH hits once and the OH hits once.

Each point of AC (once an attack is not guaranteed to land on anything but a 1, obviously) translates into 5% less damage taken.
I don't think you understand. I'm not saying that TWD wishes it were dodge. I'm saying that TWD is like dodge, and dodge is an absolutely horrible feat. The only reason anyone takes it is as a prerequisite, and that would remain true if it boosted AC by even more, or more consistently. You're constructing what is just a really bad build right now, and acting like it's good. Also, +1 AC does not translate into nearly 5% less damage. It represents almost 5% less damage against frigging weapon attacks. Weapon attacks aren't everything. Your AC counts for nothing against nearly anything that is a spell, and it also counts for very little against things that don't damage, like tripping, and your favorite thing ever, grappling. It's a narrow defense, and a tiny one, because 5% isn't much.

Edit:
And power attack doesn't actually do anything unless you drop your chance to hit.
Unless, of course, you get shock trooper. Also, as a past set of combat tests that you were involved in showed, power attack tends to cause a good amount more damage per attack on average, even accounting for the drop in to-hit.

[Emperor Tippy]

Actually, the TWFer hits at a lower rate than the THFer due to the -2 Attack penalty. The TWFer only deals the same damage as the THFer if he hits with both attacks. Within a short period of time (one or two rounds), the TWFer's damage output is more predictable than the THFer's, but in the long run the TWFer gets twice as many attacks as the THFer, but also misses twice as often, and alternates weapons.

But not investing in STR forces you to use Light weapons (Or a light weapon+rapier), and dramatically lowers damage output.
Honestly this is only true if you build a pretty crappy TWFer. Swasbuckler 3/ Factotum 1/ Unarmed Swordsage 1/ Martial Monk 2/ Sneak Attack Fighter 1.

Grab Shadow Blade, TWF, ITWF, Snap Kick, Craven, and pile on the Font of Inspiration. Throw it on a Necropolitan Gray Elf. You only loose a point of BAB so you end up with +2/+2/+2/-1/-3. Except you use Cunning Insight and 24 Int plus 20 Dex to make that +14/+14/+14/+11/+9. Each attack that hits does anywhere from +12 to +20 or so points of damage and this is at ECL 8, and you also have Weapon Supremacy to get +5 to one of those attacks each round.

Strength is nice but frankly, once you have enough to stop it from taking damage and can get Power Attack (which Martial Monk can pick up without needing Strength) it is pretty much totally secondary to a decent TWF build.

As with most everything else in D&D, the most you ever want to be dependent upon is two stats. Anything that is requiring you to keep from maxing 2 stats is pretty much always less than ideal. Where you gain from the rest of your stats is when you can afford to push them up with Inherent bonuses and items, which generally gives you a minimal bump.

In the case of a TWF its either make Dex your primary with Str as secondary or, more ideally, with Int as your secondary. The problem is that a number of Str and Dex features overlap (Weapon Finesse, for example) while virtually none of them overlap with Int.


At level 1. But Two Masterwork longswords cost 630 GP, while a masterwork Greatsword costs 350 GP, being almost half the price. And the differences get bigger from there (Though, in your defense, magic effects that deal damage do actually pay off, sort of - A +1 Flaming Greatsword only does +1d6+1 damage, while two +1 Flaming Short Swords do +2d6+2, and are cheaper than a +2 Flaming Shocking Greatsword). However, the attack bonuses don't really pay off because of how the game's Checks work.

If you are TWF then you generally want a +5 Collision weapon. If you can reliably get GMW then you want +1 Collision and the other points in whatever. Extra dice are generally ill advised for a TWF.

This is for two reasons. The first is that they don't multiply on a critical hit and you will be regularly getting critical hits with the number of attacks that you throw out and the second is almost as important, they aren't reliable. As a player you are generally well served by removing as much variability from the game as possible. You want your abilities to be predictable and consistent, otherwise they will shaft you are the least opportune time.

You can plan around consistent abilities, you can't plan around dice rolls.

[Spuddles]

What if you prefer to stay single?

Oh, that's a common misconception. While many marital monks are married, there's nothing in their code that says they MUST be. Unmarried marital monks would be things like the vengeful widower, the powerful spinster, or the matchmaker on her quest to find the Matthew McConaughey.

[Scow2]

Scow2: Each attack has a 40% hit chance, combined that's 64% hit chance per round vs the 50% of the THF.
But you don't deal full damage either hit. The TWFer is more likely to deal damage in a round, but the "average" damage ([Average Weapon Damage]/[Chance to Hit]) is stronger in the THFer's favor. Throwing in the Gambler's Fallacy to make The Law of Large Numbers apply to small numbers, if the Two-handed fighter has a 50% chance of hitting over two rounds, he hits for 2d6+(1.5xSTR) damage one round, and misses for 0 damage the next, for a total of 2d6+(1.5xSTR) damage

Now, let's say the TWFer also has a 50/50 chance of hitting with each weapon. His first attack with his main hand hits the first round for 1d6+1 damage (He's using a Shortsword for Weapon Focus+Finesse or Rapier for Finesse in his main hand), but he misses with his second attack for 0 pts. Next round, he misses with his main attack, but hits with his second for 1d6+.5 damage.

The THFer and TWFer both dealt 2d6+1.5 Damage

If we were to pull this out over several more rounds, with the THer missing every other round, the TWFer would miss once per round with each weapon in equal distribution matching the THFer... but fall behind each time he misses an attack due to his relative -10% chance of each hit landing.

Likewise, While the TWFer crits more often than the THFer, his crits are half-powered or worse: "Oh, you crit-hit, and dealt as much as the THFer deals on a normal attack. He crits, and deals more than both of your crits combined.

[OldTrees1]

Each point of AC (once an attack is not guaranteed to land on anything but a 1, obviously) translates into 5% less damage taken.


So you can't think of any pair of feats that does better than -10% damage taken or -20% damage dealt for -30% damage taken?

Karmic Strike & Knockback on a THF => Only 1 hit per opponent & You deal damage in the process.

Yeah these feats have prerequisites, however the problem with being behind on feats is that it is the deeper feats that you end up missing out on.

Maybe another example
Improved Trip & Knockdown (no missing prereqs here thanks to wolf barbarian)
=> -4 attack for enemies is ~-20% damage

[Pickford]

So you can't think of any pair of feats that does better than -10% damage taken or -20% damage dealt for -30% damage taken?

Karmic Strike & Knockback on a THF => Only 1 hit per opponent & You deal damage in the process.

Yeah these feats have prerequisites, however the problem with being behind on feats is that it is the deeper feats that you end up missing out on.

Maybe another example
Improved Trip & Knockdown (no missing prereqs here thanks to wolf barbarian)
=> -4 attack for enemies is ~-20% damage

Is the Fighter (really, the only class we're probably talking about here) starving for feats these days?

[Kennisiou]

Is the Fighter (really, the only class we're probably talking about here) starving for feats these days?

Why exactly is the fighter the only class we're talking about here? It's far from the only class that makes choices between TWF and THF.

[eggynack]

Y'know, now I'm really curious, as I always am, about what this Pickford build looks like. I mean, it's apparently taking the entire TWF line, the entire TWD line, and I think dodge is in there too. I can't tell if weapon finesse fits into the mix anywhere, but it might. It's just the most ridiculously feat starved build I've ever seen, and I haven't even seen it. The stats of it can be whatever. 32, if necessary, or 25, if not, or some other thing, if that is desired. I mostly just want to see the thing in all of its horrific glory.

[OldTrees1]

Is the Fighter (really, the only class we're probably talking about here) starving for feats these days?

With any decent level of system awareness and book access: Yes. (until 15th level and even then)

Disclaimer: Except if you like one trick ponies. One trick pony Fighters need dragon magazine before they become feat starved.

Edit: Feat glutton might be a better term than feat starved. There are so many Good and Great feats out there that no fighter need waste their time with TWD.


Dragonborn Non-Human Flawx2 Barbarian 2 / Fighter 18 = 21 feats
Combat Reflexes, Extra Rage, Power Attack, Improved Trip, Knockdown, Improved Bullrush, Knockback, Entangling Exhalation, Cleave, Weapon Focus, Three Mountain, Shape Breath, Dodge, Karmic Strike, Improved Sunder, Combat Brute, Shock Trooper, Brutal Strike, Robilar's Gambit, Standstill, Evasive Reflexes. Why no room for Sidestep?

[Pickford]

Why exactly is the fighter the only class we're talking about here? It's far from the only class that makes choices between TWF and THF.

Because the Fighter, having 11 bonus feats can absorb the entire TWF/TWD line and still have an extra 5 bonus feats to kick around. It's only really a big deal for classes that are limited to the general 7.

It also occurs that the TWF line offers the opportunity to make 3 more special attacks.

Eggynack, tell me, would you rather have 4 opportunities to disarm that enemy or 7?

TWF, requiring high dex, also lends itself to being an AoO build.

[eggynack]

Eggynack, tell me, would you rather have 4 opportunities to disarm that enemy or 7?

TWF, requiring high dex, also lends itself to being an AoO build.
Really, I must see the breakdown of this build that incorporates TWF, TWD, dodge, an AoO build, and improved disarm on top of all that. This is my sincere face, though I must admit that I find the claim rather dubious. I mean, you may be able to fit the whole thing in, but you'll end up unsatisfactory at your aims at many points during the progression.

[Ziegander]

DOODS. CHECK. THIS. OUT!

Human Fighter 4
Str 14 Dex 16 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 10 Cha 8
Feats
1st - Weapon Focus (Longsword), Weapon Focus (Shortsword), Two-Weapon Fighting
2nd - Two-Weapon Defense
3rd - Dodge
4th - Combat Reflexes

With masterwork weapons, my full attack is +6/+6 (whoa!) and I deal 1d8+2 + 1d6+1 damage per round! If I hit with both attacks I can kill a Grimlock in one round with average damage! Plus, wearing my +1 chain shirt and ring of protection +1 my AC is insane at 21! I basically never get hit!

Oh, and I almost forgot, four attacks of opportunity per round?! That's six attacks per round! WTFLOLSOMG!!


Human Fighter 4
Str 18 Dex 13 Con 13 Int 10 Wis 8 Cha 8
Feats
1st - Weapon Focus (Greatsword), Power Attack, Monkey Grip
2nd - Improved Unarmed Strike
3rd - Deflect Arrows
4th - Weapon Specialization (Greatsword)

Okay guys, this just seems unfair. With my +1 Greatsword my attack bonus is +8 and I deal 3d6+9 damage! Are you kidding me?! I one-shot an Ogre last session because I rolled a critical! That's completely crazy! If I get disarmed, I just punch a dude for 1d3+4 damage. That's a mean punch. And LOL, I know it's a little cheesy, but I can totally deflect one arrow per round by taking a hand off my Greatsword when it's not my turn. Ridiculous!

Now, lets stop being so idiotic here. The TWF build does have the AC advantage over the nonsense Greatsword build, by 4 or 5 points, but the Greatsword guy pisses all over the TWFighter in terms of damage. Average 11 vs average 19.5. He's even more accurate despite taking the terribad Monkey Grip feat. But the TWFighter has Combat Reflexes I hear you say. Who cares, he's not likely to pull off more than two AoO's per round with it, and even if both of them hit he's dealt 22 average damage. If the Greatsword guy also hits with just one AoO then he's dealt 39. And he can even deflect one arrow per round. For the lols.

[DarkSonic1337]

Has Pickford even SEEN Jack B. Quick?

[Greenish]

Hmm, you can actually build mini-Jack (or at least get High Sword Low Axe) on a human fighter (or barbarian/fighter) at 3rd level. With flaws, you could fit in Combat Reflexes and Double Hit in, and grab Karmic Strike by 6th level (though you'd have to give up barb for straight fighter).