remove double dammage from power attack when using two handed weapons.

[awa]

Just what it says on the title im just kinda throwing that out as a potential modification to the game

Because as it is two handed fighting is just better then the other forms of melee combat.

Im not worried about casters their a diffrent mess all together.

Possible considering making it a feat

what are peoples thoughts.

[Keld Denar]

Why? A melee characters only role is to deal damage, and thats already an uphill battle. Why make it even harder?

[PersonMan]

Why? A melee characters only role is to deal damage, and thats already an uphill battle. Why make it even harder?

Seconded.

...One...character...short...

[Sinfire Titan]

TWFing can keep up until you add in Shock Trooper. TWFing needs it's own form of Shock Trooper (perhaps AoO-synergy?).


Sword and Board just sucks unless you really sink into it.


Ranged combat can do some damage, but it generally has problems of it's own. We dissected it fairly well later in that thread.

[awa]

The goals is to try and make the 3 primary melee styles somewhat equal.
It seems like two handed weapons as it is is just better.

[Keld Denar]

Then bring the other forms UP to meet 2handed fighting instead of nerfing 2handing down.

[lesser_minion]

Power attack working differently for different weapons was a bad idea when it was introduced, and it hasn't improved since then. There are more ways to make a reckless or less well-aimed attack deal more damage than simply trying to put more force behind the blow.

It might be worth coming up with another, better, set of conditions for dealing doubled power attack damage (NOT "if you take another feat"), however.

[Sinfire Titan]

The goals is to try and make the 3 primary melee styles somewhat equal.
It seems like two handed weapons as it is is just better.

The real problem isn't just the damage outputs of each style though. The problem is the feat support. Take a look at all of the archery feats out there. Notice something? The good ones, the ones CO recommends for every archer ever? All involve extra attacks or damage boosters. The ones we tell you to avoid? All involve negating cover (which happens to be a minor problem at best for an archer).

For a Sword and Board Fighter, the problem is his shield can be enhanced to be better than his weapon much easier than it is to enhance both the shield and his weapon, so he ends up better off just using the shield.

For TWFers, the problem is two-fold: The feats are divided up into an overly-large tree, and their weapons are expensive to enchant.



Finally, the last two styles worth while are Bull Rushing (which requires an ACF to be worth doing) and Tripping (which is just fine).

[MachineWraith]

Then bring the other forms UP to meet 2handed fighting instead of nerfing 2handing down.

This.

Melee is already underpowered drastically when it comes to a class comparison. I wouldn't weaken any aspect of melee at all. Rather, you should bring the other forms of melee combat up to par with two-handed fighting (or maybe bring all forms up beyond two-handed fighting )

[JaxGaret]

TWF and THF already are roughly equal. If anything, just boost sword and board a bit, that's the one that needs the help.

EDIT: ninja'd multiple times over and with better points.

[Eldariel]

You have a point, of course; TWF is just a dog to THF due to a combination of dozens of factors without large amounts of precision damage (and even then, the focus is more trouble than it's worth and Shock Trooper still pulls THF far ahead).

But the solution isn't to nerf THF since all the 3 are weaker than the alternatives. So...yeah, buff TWF and S&B to match THF, not vice versa. A good starting point would be to make wielded shield do more than grant you minor AC bonus (an immediate action Block each turn within your natural reach, protection to your touch attacks, etc.) and removing the idiotic feat tax that plagues TWF (ITWF and GTWF being required to TWF later on [and no 4th iterative ever], requiring feats to attack with both weapons as a standard action and so on) and you're started. Then work from there.

[lesser_minion]

For two-weapon fighting, you should be OK making double weapons cost the normal amount to enchant and offering matched pairs of weapons that can be enchanted as a single weapon (possibly with the caveat that both have to be wielded for the magic to be effective).

As long as you remember to fix the feat tree, anyway.

Also, the biggest issue with melee isn't the fact that it's underpowered, it's the fact that it's boring. A weak but interesting class is worth something to the game as a whole. A weak and boring class is just plain sad.

[Captain Six]

Where two weapon fighting starts to shine is when you add extra dice. Sneak attack, flaming/shocking/frost, etc. Find a way to get pounce and add charging damage onto that. Take a look at prestige classes, I know there are a ton of them that help various styles. Power attack is for two-handed fighting, for other combat types you need to look at various resources and start to get clever.

[Hadrian_Emrys]

The following in probably the first change that needs to be made to the fighting style feat system in order to make TWF something other than the gimpy younger sibling of THF:

Two-Weapon Fighting
Benefit:
You can make as many attacks with your off-hand weapon as with your primary weapon, using the same base attack bonus. You still take the normal penalties for fighting with two weapons. You may also make attacks with both equipped weapons as part of a single attack of opportunity or attack action.

Normal:
Without this feat, you can only get a single attack with an off-hand weapon.

______________________________________

In any case, the 2 for 1 deal isn't the problem so much as the fact that power attack should use the mechanics of the Heedless Charge tactical maneuver. Since when has a pro baseball player had to lose accuracy in order to crack a ball out of the park? Really, am I alone in feeling that the retarded "fluff>crunch" approach to design that WotC has is the single worst enemy their products?

[Nero24200]

Might be a nitpick, but I'd also look to weapon enhancment costs. It always bugged me that it costs the same to enchant a foot long dagger as it does a greatsword.

Maybe making onehanded and light weapons cost only half as much to enhance (same as sheilds) would up their appeal a little, even if only a little.

[awa]

no the worst problems is insufficient play-testing

Right now all im worried about is balancing the melee styles.

comparing melee to other charecter types is something diffrent entirely and not my concern right now

Okay i think i should rephrase my question to narrow the focus. Will removing the double damage from power attack make a core only fighter using a great sword to weak to compete with a fighter who chose to use a shield or a double axe.

[Hadrian_Emrys]

no the worst problems is insufficient play-testing

Indeed, it is step two down the road of design failure.

[Matthew]

Just what it says on the title I'm just kinda throwing that out as a potential modification to the game

Because as it is two handed fighting is just better then the other forms of melee combat.

I'm not worried about casters their a different mess all together.

Possible considering making it a feat

what are peoples thoughts.

In 3.0 it is a 1:1 exchange for all weapons. Whether you make all weapons 1:1, 1:2, 1:3 or whatever just depends on the power curve you want for the game. You have got the right general idea. You might have to give two-handed weapons +1 to hit or some such thing to "balance" them against shields (it will not be perfectly balanced) and you will have to watch out for fighting with two weapons, as the effective doubling of attacks will need to be weighed against the feat investiture.

[Wings of Peace]

If something is too rad for everything else un-radding it will not make the other two cooler, it just means you've made the world a less rad place to live, and that is punishable by death in some states.

[Curmudgeon]

Right now all im worried about is balancing the melee styles.

Well, you'll be leveling things somewhat for TWF and light weapon fighters (mostly unarmed types like the Monk -- and we don't need to go into how much they need the help, do we? ).

Okay i think i should rephrase my question to narrow the focus. Will removing the double damage from power attack make a core only fighter using a great sword to weak to compete with a fighter who chose to use a shield or a double axe.

I don't get why you you're sticking "core only" into this question. There are a lot of supplements out there, and this restriction needs some justification.

[Roderick_BR]

Yeah, beefing the others up is better.
For TWF, remove the stupid "no PA for u" limit for light weapons. Instead of no benefit, make it add half the bonus at least. And fix TWF itself so a character can actually use it.
For sword and board, two change I mentioned in others thread is to make shields better (AC bonus: buckler +1, light +2, heavy +3, tower+4 with only a -1 attack penalty), and count against touch (merge Use Shield with PHB2's Shield Ward). Others feats that could be merged are Shield Specialization and Active Shield Defense (both PHB2), for a tactical defense/AoO fighter.

This way, meelers get more and better options, and will make a player think which option to take instead of automatically go the 2-handed PA route.

[Grommen]

Might be a nitpick, but I'd also look to weapon enhancment costs. It always bugged me that it costs the same to enchant a foot long dagger as it does a greatsword.

Maybe making onehanded and light weapons cost only half as much to enhance (same as sheilds) would up their appeal a little, even if only a little.

Or allow people to enchant both weapons being wielded at the same time.

I have always allowed full strength with the off hand for damage. I guess cause in Real life my right is just as good as my left in terms of smacking someone. Might be a little weaker, but not half.

And their is a feat called Oversized two weapon fighting that I've been getting a lot of good use out of. Lets you use two medium weapons instead of a Medium and a Small. Cuts down on feats needed for your TWF.

And I've always thought that Sword and Board was pretty kool on it's own. Sure you have a lower damage output but at low levels you can have a very good AC, thuss it might take a round or two longer but you'll take out the baddie, and have hit points to spare. In my games were always running out of those and healing spells.

Is also nothing preventing you from using all 3 forms of melee fighting styles on one character. Might have to use that dreaded fighter for a few levels till you get enough feats.

And to stop your casters from running away with the game. Use a stick on them every time they min/max, optimize, or power game. They will stop. Or you'll need a new group. Either way the problem is solved.

[Eldariel]

no the worst problems is insufficient play-testing

Right now all im worried about is balancing the melee styles.

comparing melee to other charecter types is something diffrent entirely and not my concern right now

Okay i think i should rephrase my question to narrow the focus. Will removing the double damage from power attack make a core only fighter using a great sword to weak to compete with a fighter who chose to use a shield or a double axe.

No, it probably wouldn't. THFers are fairly good for other reasons too, though losing Power Attack would suck. Mostly, it would raise the importance of having bonus damage dice like Sneak Attack a lot, as Power Attack is the principal means through which people without 'em keep up.

It would also further reduce the variety between different fighting styles and make combat less interesting so I definitely think it's a step backwards; all up to you, of course. But I definitely think buffing TWF and S&B is the better option. At least removing the ****ing feat tax from TWF. That has no reason to exist whatever. There's no excuse for it.

[jpreem]

If something is too rad for everything else un-radding it will not make the other two cooler, it just means you've made the world a less rad place to live, and that is punishable by death in some states.

TRUE :D I hate general handicappers :D

[awa]

out side of core has things were not using and im not familiar with i don't own tome of battle am not planning to buy tome of battle and many other books so if those particular books change the equation it doesn't really matter becuase i don't have access to them and my budget is to tight to purchase them.

Also like i said this is largely theoretical

[PhoenixRivers]

My personal recommendation?

Build up the others, but require feats.

Why require feats? To make these options less attractive for CoDzilla, for one. It's a way to truly give melee something nice.

To that extent:

Spoiler

Show

Two Weapon Fighting

Prerequisite: Dex 15
Benefit: You benefit from iterative attacks on off-hand attacks with manufactured weapons. Penalties for attacking with multiple weapons in combat are lessened by -2 and -6 (to -4/-4, or -2/-2 if all offhand weapons are light weapons).

Improved Two Weapon Fighting

Prerequisite: Dex 17, Two Weapon Fighting
Benefit: Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced to -2/-2 (or -0/-0 if all off hand weapons are light). In addition, you may apply your full strength modifier to off hand weapon attacks.

Two Weapon Rend

Prerequisite: Dex 15, Two Weapon Fighting, BAB 6 or higher
Benefit: If you hit with two different weapons while wielding more than one weapon in combat, you automatically rend the target. This damage is equal to the damage of the lesser weapon, and benefits from your full Strength bonus.

Agile Combatant

Prerequisite: Dex 15, Weapon Finesse, Two Weapon Fighting
Benefit: If you make a full attack with multiple weapons, you may use your Dexterity modifier instead of Strength for any attacks you make in the round with any weapon that qualifies for Weapon finesse.

[Greenish]

And their is a feat called Oversized two weapon fighting that I've been getting a lot of good use out of. Lets you use two medium weapons instead of a Medium and a Small. Cuts down on feats needed for your TWF.

How does using a feat to get an average of +1 damage for your offhand cut down your feats needed?

And to stop your casters from running away with the game. Use a stick on them every time they min/max, optimize, or power game. They will stop. Or you'll need a new group. Either way the problem is solved.

Some people like to optimize. If that's a problem, talk to them instead of just punishing them.

[PhoenixRivers]

How does using a feat to get an average of +1 damage for your offhand cut down your feats needed?

For one, it makes you able to benefit from Power Attack on off hand weapons without using unarmed strikes (which require their own feat) or taking a -2 to hit with all attacks (for using a non-light weapon anyway).

Not saying feats are less needed, only that it does more than an average of +1 damage. Even if you eat the -2 penalty, that equates to a loss of 2 damage per attack.

[ericgrau]

Shock trooper is the real issue, which this only half fixes, and doesn't really address this issue directly. Power attack by itself becomes a trap later on as the AB penalty isn't worth it or cancels out most of the benefit even when it is worth it. Later on most damage comes from enchantments too. Without shock trooper, TWF, a shield and ranged does almost as much damage as THF. Meanwhile TWF gives an advantage with bonus damage and special attacks, a shield cuts the physical damage you take in half (yes, this is awesome b/c melee often dies too), and range has a strategic advantage besides having more sources to boost attack bonus plus the ability to enchant various arrows on top of bow damage. And this isn't just theory; most people in real life say "Huh? Our TWFer looks like he's doing the same damage as our THFer" (actually it's slightly, unnoticeably less). The shield guy isn't too far behind in damage, and moving around him while eating an attack of opportunity is a big waste of time in a game where most of the combat happens within the first two rounds. If physical attacks were everything, a THFer doesn't even stand a chance against someone with a shield in a duel as the shield is cutting damage received almost in half while damage output is only slightly reduced.

In short, you have 3 perfectly viable options for various situations, and you don't even have to stick to your specialty all the time. Everybody is having fun and happy in 90% of real games before going online and learning the dark arts of obscure optimization. So now the real solution: ban shock trooper. When optimizers across the internet are all harping over 1 portion of 1 ability in almost all of their builds, that should be the biggest clue that some designer somewhere made a huge mistake. I have a list of maybe 7 things D&D could really do without, and this is one of them.

[lord_khaine]

I agree, the real problem is shock trooper, when that isnt allowed the difference between TWF and THF isnt quite as big.