[4e] On new "Two-Weapon Fighting" Powers

[Gralamin]

Edit: Apparently I can't change the title of the entire thread. So, in big bold:

This thread has been Necro'd, and should be locked.

This is continued from the by RAW thread. The original question was:

Okay, so maybe this isn't all that simple. I've seen quite a few interpretations of how powers like Whirling Frenzy (Primal Power 11) works in regards to static damage. As a sample scenario, say we have a whirling barbarian with 18 strength (+4 modifier), Weapon focus (+1 damage) and two +1 broadswords. When he uses this power, is the damage:

1) 1d10+1d10+4+1+1 = 2d10+6 damage (All static modifiers apply once)
2) 1d10+1+1d10+1+4+1 = 2d10+7 damage, (Enhancement bonus of each weapon applies, other mods apply once)
3) 1d10+1+1+1d10+1+1+4 = 2d10+8 damage (Static modifiers other then ability modifier apply on each, ability modifier applies once), or
4) 1d10+4+1+1+1d10+4+1+1 = 2d10+12 damage (All static modifiers apply on both).

The character's builder's answer in this situation is 1d10+1[W]+6 damage, where the second 1[W] is presumably just another 1d10. However, this answer is still ambiguous.
I've been playing it as #2, but it'd be good to know for sure.

The following are the posts of debate that have continued.

A 54

* 1[W] refers only to the damage dice of the weapon when it's mundane. In this case, 1d10.
* +str mod is added by the power itself. Note that some powers don't add a stat mod (like Twin Strike).
* Enhancement Bonus is added when you hit with the weapon. You're not hitting with your offhand weapon. Enchanting an offhand weapon is usually a useless thing to do, with the exception of a Ranger, who makes separate attacks with each weapon.
* Weapon Focus adds to your damage when you hit with the weapon. See Enhancement Bonus explanation above.

So, you get 1[Main-W] + 1[Off-W] + Str Mod + Main-Enh + Weapon Focus = 1d10 + 1d10 + 4 + 1 + 1 = 2d10+6

So #1 is correct.

A 54 Contention
A good attempt at coming up with a RAW answer, but missing on several points that you haven't bothered to address. The following is just what I found that supports multiple possible interpretations.

A 54

First off, it is hardly by RAW if you do not quote any sources, at all.

* 1[W] refers only to the damage dice of the weapon when it's mundane. In this case, 1d10.

Not mundane though. Your statement suggests a magical weapon should be different, but you do not address how.

* +str mod is added by the power itself. Note that some powers don't add a stat mod (like Twin Strike).

Page 57 of the PHB states:

Some powers add modifiers to attack rolls or damage rolls. These modifiers apply to any roll of the dice, but not to ongoing damage or other static non variable effects.

Since 1[W] Main-hand and 1[W] Off-hand could be argued to be two different rolls of the dice, an argument exists for the strength modifier applying to both.

* Enhancement Bonus is added when you hit with the weapon. You're not hitting with your offhand weapon. Enchanting an offhand weapon is usually a useless thing to do, with the exception of a Ranger, who makes separate attacks with each weapon.

According to PHB 225:

Magic weapons and implements grant their enhancement bonus to attack rolls and damage rolls only when you use powers delivered through the weapon the weapon or the implement

. It is unclear what constitutes delivering a power through a weapon, so this does not preclude the chance of both applying.
In addition, Ranger is not the only exception. A normal barbarian, Tempest fighters, and a few other classes, all have separate attack powers as well.

* Weapon Focus adds to your damage when you hit with the weapon. See Enhancement Bonus explanation above.

Weapon focus adds on any damage roll. A damage roll is defined on page 276 as

• Roll the damage indicated in the power description...
• ...Add the ability modifier specified in the power description

This would, include everything on the hit effect line as part of the damage roll, and thus weapon focus should only be applied once.

So, you get 1[Main-W] + 1[Off-W] + Str Mod + Main-Enh + Weapon Focus = 1d10 + 1d10 + 4 + 1 + 1 = 2d10+6

Still not clear this is right.

A 54

"First off, it is hardly by RAW if you do not quote any sources, at all."

I don't need to quote things to be right.

"Not mundane though. Your statement suggests a magical weapon should be different, but you do not address how."

Erm... I'm referring to the damage dice the weapon has on it's own without any bonuses at all. It's the definition of [W]... Which is 1d10 in this case. It's the "mundane" damage before any magic or modifiers. It surprises me that you didn't find that to be clear.

"Page 57 of the PHB states:
Since 1[W] Main-hand and 1[W] Off-hand could be argued to be two different rolls of the dice, an argument exists for the strength modifier applying to both."

It's 1 damage roll. To be 2 damage rolls, it'd have to say:
Hit: 1[W] + str mod
Hit: 1[W] (offhand) + str mod
Which it doesn't. The powers have 1 "Hit:" line, and therefore 1 damage roll that happens to include multiple dice. What you're saying is the same as adding str mod twice for something that says "Hit: 2[W]+str mod damage". If they wanted you to deal the str mod damage twice, they'd say it twice in the power's "Hit:" line or list separate "Hit" lines for each weapon.

"According to PHB 225:
. It is unclear what constitutes delivering a power through a weapon, so this does not preclude the chance of both applying."

You are hitting with only the main weapon, therefore are delivering the power through only the main weapon. You're merely dealing some damage with the off-hand weapon.

"In addition, Ranger is not the only exception. A normal barbarian, Tempest fighters, and a few other classes, all have separate attack powers as well."

You're stretching. What I mean is clear. This isn't even relevant to your question.

" Weapon focus adds on any damage roll. A damage roll is defined on page 276 as"

Regardless... It's still a single damage roll, so this doesn't change. And even if you ignore that fact, it still doesn't stack with itself as it's a feat bonus. So there's 2 reasons for you. But thanks for looking that up, I'll let the Fighter in my group know to add to his Rain of Steel damage and Reaping Strike misses.

It's still 2d10+6 in your scenario.

I do not debate, and I've fully clarified everything that I mean, so I won't reply to this answer further.

A 54

I agree with your answer, it just isn't clear by RAW, and you act as if it is.

"First off, it is hardly by RAW if you do not quote any sources, at all."

I don't need to quote things to be right.

So wait, I ask for quotes supporting your claim, bring up quotes that make whether this is true ambiguous, explain why, and you respond with simply "I'm right" and not give any actual quotes to support your view?

This is a very poor way to answer a question by RAW, since currently, the only insurance I have that your answer is right is that it is your opinion. Not that it matters, since apparently you refuse to respond more to this question for some reason.

"Not mundane though. Your statement suggests a magical weapon should be different, but you do not address how."

Erm... I'm referring to the damage dice the weapon has on it's own without any bonuses at all. It's the definition of [W]... Which is 1d10 in this case. It's the "mundane" damage before any magic or modifiers. It surprises me that you didn't find that to be clear.

Your statement could of been read two ways: It's the damage die before magic, OR a magical weapon has additional rules. You may of found it clear, but otherwise it is ambiguous.

"Page 57 of the PHB states:
Since 1[W] Main-hand and 1[W] Off-hand could be argued to be two different rolls of the dice, an argument exists for the strength modifier applying to both."

It's 1 damage roll. To be 2 damage rolls, it'd have to say:
Hit: 1[W] + str mod
Hit: 1[W] (offhand) + str mod
Which it doesn't. The powers have 1 "Hit:" line, and therefore 1 damage roll that happens to include multiple dice. What you're saying is the same as adding str mod twice for something that says "Hit: 2[W]+str mod damage". If they wanted you to deal the str mod damage twice, they'd say it twice in the power's "Hit:" line or list separate "Hit" lines for each weapon.

That specific line did not say it had to be a damage roll - It only said it had to be a roll of the dice, and doesn't say there is one roll of the dice per hit. Poor wording on WoTC Part, and you are probably interpreting it how it is meant to be, but this isn't about RAI, its about RAW.

"According to PHB 225:
. It is unclear what constitutes delivering a power through a weapon, so this does not preclude the chance of both applying."

You are hitting with only the main weapon, therefore are delivering the power through only the main weapon. You're merely dealing some damage with the off-hand weapon.

Prove it. I haven't see a RAW quote that saids so.

"In addition, Ranger is not the only exception. A normal barbarian, Tempest fighters, and a few other classes, all have separate attack powers as well."

You're stretching. What I mean is clear. This isn't even relevant to your question.

I was merely pointing out an error in your facts.

" Weapon focus adds on any damage roll. A damage roll is defined on page 276 as"

Regardless... It's still a single damage roll, so this doesn't change. And even if you ignore that fact, it still doesn't stack with itself as it's a feat bonus. So there's 2 reasons for you. But thanks for looking that up, I'll let the Fighter in my group know to add to his Rain of Steel damage and Reaping Strike misses.

...Didn't I just say that? Didn't I just find RAW justification for your claim, and say that part at least was definitely right? How is that regardless?


Regardless, if I cannot get a more definite RAW answer in the next post, this has grown enough that it should be it's own thread.

------
Essentially, I am trying to clear out some of the inherit ambiguity because of some very badly worded rules.
The answer I received in the thread has very little RAW support (Or, the poster simply refuses to give any RAW support), and so I expand to a new thread for any further discussion.

Edit: Apparently I can't change the title of the entire thread. So, in big bold:

This thread has been Necro'd, and should be locked.

[Mando Knight]

All modifiers are applied once. Whirling Frenzy places all of the damage dice in a single expression, and so regardless of how many different dice you roll, it only as one damage roll. If the damage roll was split up into two expressions (i.e. 1[W] (main-hand) damage and 1[W] (off-hand) damage), then they would apply twice. It's the same as if you rolled Sneak Attack damage on the opponent. Unless it breaks up the damage rolls by specifying two different "X damage" statements, it's only one damage roll. The enchantment modifiers of your off-hand weapon still get applied even though Weapon Focus and such aren't, since enchantment modifiers get added any time the weapon is being used in a damage roll.

Whirling Rend, for example, specifies a second opponent that takes 1[W] (off-hand) damage, which is a second damage roll and gets all of the modifiers that apply to your off-hand damage calculations applied to it.

[Gralamin]

All modifiers are applied once. Whirling Frenzy places all of the damage dice in a single expression, and so regardless of how many different dice you roll, it only as one damage roll. If the damage roll was split up into two expressions (i.e. 1[W] (main-hand) damage and 1[W] (off-hand) damage), then they would apply twice. It's the same as if you rolled Sneak Attack damage on the opponent. Unless it breaks up the damage rolls by specifying two different "X damage" statements, it's only one damage roll. The enchantment modifiers of your off-hand weapon still get applied even though Weapon Focus and such aren't, since enchantment modifiers get added any time the weapon is being used in a damage roll.

Whirling Rend, for example, specifies a second opponent that takes 1[W] (off-hand) damage, which is a second damage roll and gets all of the modifiers that apply to your off-hand damage calculations applied to it.

So you would argue it should be the second possibility I listed? Interesting... Any RAW quotes that would indicate this for sure you could give me?

[Mando Knight]

So you would argue it should be the second possibility I listed? Interesting... Any RAW quotes that would indicate this for sure you could give me?

Easy. "1[W] + 1[W] (off-hand) + Strength modifier damage." Right there on the power block. Those are all added together in one single damage expression.

[Gralamin]

Easy. "1[W] + 1[W] (off-hand) + Strength modifier damage." Right there on the power block. Those are all added together in one single damage expression.

That isn't as straight forward as you seem to think.

The PHB saids enhancement bonus is added when...

Magic weapons and implements grant their enhancement bonus to attack rolls and damage rolls only when you use powers delivered through the weapon the weapon or the implement

And it isn't very clear what delivering it means. It could be interpreted as having a damage roll, but equally it could be interpreted as requiring an attack roll. Do you have any better way to indicate this for sure? Because I'd love to have it.

[Mando Knight]

That isn't as straight forward as you seem to think.

The PHB saids enhancement bonus is added when...
And it isn't very clear what delivering it means. It could be interpreted as having a damage roll, but equally it could be interpreted as requiring an attack roll. Do you have any better way to indicate this for sure? Because I'd love to have it.

If you use the weapon for an attack roll, you apply its enhancement bonus to the attack roll. If you use the weapon for a damage roll, you apply its enhancement bonus to the damage roll. Unless otherwise stated, the weapon you use for the attack roll has to be the same weapon as the one used for the damage roll. Barbarian TWF powers state that they add in off-hand damage dice, so they use the off-hand weapon for the damage roll as well as the main-hand weapon.

[Douglas]

I think it is a reasonable interpretation that the offhand weapon's enhancement bonus does apply to damage, but remember that multiple bonuses of the same type do not stack. Under this interpretation you would get whichever enhancement bonus is better.

[Gralamin]

If you use the weapon for an attack roll, you apply its enhancement bonus to the attack roll. If you use the weapon for a damage roll, you apply its enhancement bonus to the damage roll. Unless otherwise stated, the weapon you use for the attack roll has to be the same weapon as the one used for the damage roll. Barbarian TWF powers state that they add in off-hand damage dice, so they use the off-hand weapon for the damage roll as well as the main-hand weapon.

Okay, that makes sense. This is what happens when I've been using too many different systems lately.

I think it is a reasonable interpretation that the offhand weapon's enhancement bonus does apply to damage, but remember that multiple bonuses of the same type do not stack. Under this interpretation you would get whichever enhancement bonus is better.

Oh, I forgot about this, which seals it to #1 unless you could argue that it still falls under "Different rolls" part. Tricky question.

[Hashmir]

I think it is a reasonable interpretation that the offhand weapon's enhancement bonus does apply to damage, but remember that multiple bonuses of the same type do not stack. Under this interpretation you would get whichever enhancement bonus is better.

Not for the damage roll. The enhancement bonuses don't stack, but they don't need to, because each weapon's enhancement bonus is part of its [W], just like weapon focus.

[TGWG]

the difference of this is realy important. If they are one damage roll then the tempest barbarian just needs 1 magic weapon and a nonmagical one. If it is 2 damage rolls then we can plan accordingly.

but perhaps we are asking the wrong question. Perhaps the question isn't "does it count as one damage roll." Perhaps the question should be "should it count as one damage roll"

below i will set up a comparison between the damage outputs of the ranger's twin strike and the barbarian's whirling rend at lev1, 6, 11, 16, 21, 26,and 30. For comparison's sake they both begin with 18 str, are using level aproppriate magic waraxes, have weapon focus, the barbarian is not raging, and there are no paragon paths or epic destinies. i also omit the other stats besides str because they are not relevent to this comparison.

"one roll"

{TABLE]ranger|barbarian
1d12+1;+1d12+1;+1d6|1d12+4+1;+1d12
average: 18.5| average;18
1d12+1+2;+1d12+1+2;+1d6|1d12+4+1+2,1d12
average: 22.5| average; 20
1d12+2+3;+1d12+2+3;+2d6|1d12+5+2+3,+1d12
average: 30| average; 23
1d12++2+4;+1d12+2+4;+2d6|1d12+6+2+4,+1d12
average: 32| average; 25
2d12+3+5;+2d12+3+5;+3d6|2d12+7+3+5,+2d12
average: 52.5| average; 41
2d12+3+6;+2d12+3+6;+3d6|2d12+7+3+6,+2d12
average: 54.5| average; 42
2d12+3+6;+2d12+3+6;+3d6|2d12+8+3+6,+2d12
average: 54.5|average; 43[/TABLE]


"two rolls"

{TABLE]ranger|barbarian
1d12+1;+1d12+1;+1d6|1d12+4+1;+1d12+1
average: 18.5|average;19
1d12+1+2;+1d12+1+2;+1d6|1d12+4+1+2,1d12+1+2
average: 22.5|average; 23
1d12+2+3;+1d12+2+3;+2d6|1d12+5+2+3,+1d12+2+3
average: 30|average; 28
1d12++2+4;+1d12+2+4;+2d6|1d12+6+2+4,+1d12+2+4
average: 32|average; 31
2d12+3+5;+2d12+3+5;+3d6|2d12+7+3+5,+2d12+3+5
average: 52.5|average; 49
2d12+3+6;+2d12+3+6;+3d6|2d12+7+3+6,+2d12+3+6
average: 54.5|average; 51
2d12+3+6;+2d12+3+6;+3d6|2d12+8+3+6,+2d12+3+6
average: 54.5|average; 52[/TABLE]

while the second table seems fairer don't forget that the tempest barbararian (on average) has better Hp, better AC, and can rage to further increase his damage. If the two damage rolls rule is adopted this would make tempest barbarians vastly superior to two weapon rangers.

[Gralamin]

Thread Necromancy, I see. However, I feel the need to address a point.

the difference of this is realy important. If they are one damage roll then the tempest barbarian just needs 1 magic weapon and a nonmagical one. If it is 2 damage rolls then we can plan accordingly.

but perhaps we are asking the wrong question. Perhaps the question isn't "does it count as one damage roll." Perhaps the question should be "should it count as one damage roll"

below i will set up a comparison between the damage outputs of the ranger's twin strike and the barbarian's whirling rend at lev1, 6, 11, 16, 21, 26,and 30. For comparison's sake they both begin with 18 str, are using level aproppriate magic waraxes, have weapon focus, the barbarian is not raging, and there are no paragon paths or epic destinies. i also omit the other stats besides str because they are not relevent to this comparison.

"one roll"

{TABLE]ranger|barbarian
1d12+1;+1d12+1;+1d6|1d12+4+1;+1d12
average: 18.5| average;18
1d12+1+2;+1d12+1+2;+1d6|1d12+4+1+2,1d12
average: 22.5| average; 20
1d12+2+3;+1d12+2+3;+2d6|1d12+5+2+3,+1d12
average: 30| average; 23
1d12++2+4;+1d12+2+4;+2d6|1d12+6+2+4,+1d12
average: 32| average; 25
2d12+3+5;+2d12+3+5;+3d6|2d12+7+3+5,+2d12
average: 52.5| average; 41
2d12+3+6;+2d12+3+6;+3d6|2d12+7+3+6,+2d12
average: 54.5| average; 42
2d12+3+6;+2d12+3+6;+3d6|2d12+8+3+6,+2d12
average: 54.5|average; 43[/TABLE]


"two rolls"

{TABLE]ranger|barbarian
1d12+1;+1d12+1;+1d6|1d12+4+1;+1d12+1
average: 18.5|average;19
1d12+1+2;+1d12+1+2;+1d6|1d12+4+1+2,1d12+1+2
average: 22.5|average; 23
1d12+2+3;+1d12+2+3;+2d6|1d12+5+2+3,+1d12+2+3
average: 30|average; 28
1d12++2+4;+1d12+2+4;+2d6|1d12+6+2+4,+1d12+2+4
average: 32|average; 31
2d12+3+5;+2d12+3+5;+3d6|2d12+7+3+5,+2d12+3+5
average: 52.5|average; 49
2d12+3+6;+2d12+3+6;+3d6|2d12+7+3+6,+2d12+3+6
average: 54.5|average; 51
2d12+3+6;+2d12+3+6;+3d6|2d12+8+3+6,+2d12+3+6
average: 54.5|average; 52[/TABLE]

while the second table seems fairer don't forget that the tempest barbararian (on average) has better Hp, better AC, and can rage to further increase his damage. If the two damage rolls rule is adopted this would make tempest barbarians vastly superior to two weapon rangers.

No, they would not be. But, nothing should be near Ranger's DPS: It is far too high. Even if this was a good topic to pursue, you are not doing so in the right way - you are discounting far too much to have a fair comparison, especially since the maths behind most of this is simple.

In addition, its been mostly established (ish, still arguments). That the Barbarian off-hand attacks still get extra critical hit damage.

Edit: Apparently I can't change the title of the entire thread. So, in big bold:

This thread has been Necro'd, and should be locked.

[Inyssius Tor]

Not for the damage roll. The enhancement bonuses don't stack, but they don't need to, because each weapon's enhancement bonus is part of its [W], just like weapon focus.

If that were true, they would be multiplied by multiple-[W] powers. Since they're not, it's not. You add your enhancement bonus to the damage roll, and you can't stack bonuses of the same type on one roll.

[Quietus]

Perhaps if you were to do a chart like that for one- and two-roll statistics, with the raging barbarian, it would help to see where things should be balanced at? Regardless of whether it's RAW or not, it would be nice to see where things SHOULD be.. and then we can guess at where the Barbarian's power level should be in comparison to the Ranger.

[TGWG]

No, they would not be. But, nothing should be near Ranger's DPS: It is far too high.

i was comparing the at-wills both of them are likely to use. in the first table the barbarian trails behind the ranger and more or less equals the rangers output when in a rage. In the second table the barbarian's damage output almost equals the rangers and outright surpasses it during his rage.

also while the barbarian may not (hasn't be proven yet) be able to out damage the ranger with encounter and daily powers i'd like to point out that since the barbarian's secondary stat is (dex combined with his "barbarian agility" ability) the barbarian has much more AC and HP then the two weapon ranger, allowing him to do his damage for longer. so if you tradeoff a little bit of damage you get a hefty increase in defense

Even if this was a good topic to pursue, you are not doing so in the right way - you are discounting far too much to have a fair comparison, especially since the maths behind most of this is simple.

please enlighten me.

In addition, its been mostly established (ish, still arguments). That the Barbarian off-hand attacks still get extra critical hit damage.

that's also a difficult question. if it counts as the same damage roll then the offhand damage would be maxed. if it's 2 different rolls then you would apply the offhand weapon's crit property on the offhand weapon's target.

If that were true, they would be multiplied by multiple-[W] powers. Since they're not, it's not. You add your enhancement bonus to the damage roll, and you can't stack bonuses of the same type on one roll.

true, but what we're deciding is if it counts as 2 damage rolls, which would allow you to apply enhancement bonuses twice.

Perhaps if you were to do a chart like that for one- and two-roll statistics, with the raging barbarian, it would help to see where things should be balanced at? Regardless of whether it's RAW or not, it would be nice to see where things SHOULD be.. and then we can guess at where the Barbarian's power level should be in comparison to the Ranger.

very well here it is


"one role with rage"

{TABLE]ranger|barbarian
1d12+1;+1d12+1;+1d6|1d12+4+1+4;+1d12+4
average: 18.5| average;26
1d12+1+2;+1d12+1+2;+1d6|1d12+4+1+2+4,1d12+4
average: 22.5| average; 28
1d12+2+3;+1d12+2+3;+2d6|1d12+5+2+3+5,+1d12+5
average: 30| average; 33
1d12++2+4;+1d12+2+4;+2d6|1d12+6+2+4+6,+1d12+6
average: 32| average; 37
2d12+3+5;+2d12+3+5;+3d6|2d12+7+3+5+7,+2d12+7
average: 52.5| average; 55
2d12+3+6;+2d12+3+6;+3d6|2d12+7+3+6+7,+2d12+7
average: 54.5| average; 56
2d12+3+6;+2d12+3+6;+3d6|2d12+8+3+6+8,+2d12+8
average: 54.5|average; 58[/TABLE]


"two roll with rage"

{TABLE]ranger|barbarian
1d12+1;+1d12+1;+1d6|1d12+4+1+4;+1d12+1+4
average: 18.5|average;27
1d12+1+2;+1d12+1+2;+1d6|1d12+4+1+2+4,1d12+1+2+4
average: 22.5|average; 31
1d12+2+3;+1d12+2+3;+2d6|1d12+5+2+3+5,+1d12+2+3+5
average: 30|average; 38
1d12++2+4;+1d12+2+4;+2d6|1d12+6+2+4+6,+1d12+2+4+6
average: 32|average; 43
2d12+3+5;+2d12+3+5;+3d6|2d12+7+3+5+7,+2d12+3+5+7
average: 52.5|average; 63
2d12+3+6;+2d12+3+6;+3d6|2d12+7+3+6+7,+2d12+3+6+7
average: 54.5|average; 65
2d12+3+6;+2d12+3+6;+3d6|2d12+8+3+6+8,+2d12+3+6+8
average: 54.5|average; 68[/TABLE]

the barbarian's doing more damage then I originally thought

p.s; please tell me if i've made any mistakes in my calculations. statistically i'll be wrong eventualy.

[KillianHawkeye]

This thread has been Necro'd, and should be locked.

This thread is less than 2 months old. I don't think it quite counts as necromancy yet.

[Mando Knight]

This thread is less than 2 months old. I don't think it quite counts as necromancy yet.

It's not two months, it's one and a half. The "use by" date for this thread was the 22nd.

[KillianHawkeye]

I was actually referring to the total age, but you have a point.