|
5 years ago ::
Jul 13, 2008 - 9:30AM
#201
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2008
|
maybe someone's mentioned this, but the two weapon fighting feat is exactly like weilding a verstile weapon in two hands, especially if you're of the school that says "the off hand weapon aids the primary weapon and does that extra point of damage." Then why should i use a feat when all i have to do is use a long sword or battle ax (first to mind) two handed and use my feat for weapon focus. That does more damage than two weapon fighting in the same number of feats.
I do, however, agree with General about trying to rework the entire rules for a nonranger class to dual wield. He has us pro-dual-ers beat in the sense that it's easier to start from scratch than it is to make something alien fit a complete class. Obviously a two weapon fighter could do too much damage with some of his powers.
I think fourth edition's attempt to tweak and weaken two weapon fighting is a good step because it did unbalance the game. But it is flawed in the sense that it offers no benefit.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 13, 2008 - 9:31AM
#202
|
Date Joined:
Jan 20, 2002
|
If you have such a problem say
"You may Make 2 standard attack actions a turn if you do not use a move or minor action."
In otherwords Full Attack for 4e. Ranger still reigns supreme, and you get both weapons to attack.
Even I'll admit that's too strong.
But everyone, refresh us naysayers. Show me how a fighter who spends 2 feats on Two-Weapon Fighting and Two-Weapon defense compares to a fighter who spends 2 feats on Weapon Proficiency (Bastard Sword) and Armor Proficiency (Plate). The Bastard Sword user is using it two-handed, while the TWFer is using a longsword and what-ever (you'll note that the TWFer could spend a feat on bastard sword proficiency and plate proficiency, but then they should have an advantage due to spending extra feats).
I'll be simple; since they're both sword-fighters they both have the same stats (they need Dex for the sword feat prerequisites). We'll say the Fighter is starting with an 18 Strength, because there's no str multiplier on two-handers to mess with things. Their everything else will be the same, except their damage outputs.
Now, here's the differences in their stats at 1st level:
Damage TWFer THFer
1[W] 1d8+5 (9.5) 1d10+5 (10.5)
2[W] 2d8+5 (14) 2d10+5 (16)
3[W] 3d8+5 (18.5) 3d10+5 (21.5) The THFer still deals more damage than the TWFer when they spend the same number of feats. If all feats are created equal, you'd expect the TWFer to have some advantage over the THFer. As it stands now, I believe there are simply better things to spend your feat on (you want to have a throwing off-hand weapon? Spend your feat on Quickdraw and use a two-hander, throw javelins instead of throwing hammers/axes since javelins have better range).
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 13, 2008 - 9:31AM
#203
|
Date Joined:
Jun 25, 2008
|
Are there any TWF Defenders out there and are they balanced correctly?
Make your own and forget about balance. As long as the powers match roughly with other classes in the same role, a few points here and there won't matter as long as everyone is having fun.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 13, 2008 - 9:38AM
#204
|
Date Joined:
Jul 10, 2003
|
If all feats are created equal, you'd expect the TWFer to have some advantage over the THFer.
not all feats are equal. Especially not across all classes.
As to the advantage, versatility. (it's been illustrated a number of times in this thread)
and forget about balance.
. . . 
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 13, 2008 - 9:39AM
#205
|
Date Joined:
Aug 12, 2006
|
20 or so of us have explained the math behind that. 20 of us have explained that puts TWF right up there with THF. Is THF not an option, either? 20 of us have explained that it gives the fighter versatility. You're just being willfully ignorant at this point because "OMG I CAN'T POWERGAME."
20 faulty arguments do not constitute one good argument. Twf is in no way 'right up there' with thf.
edit: nm, Xeviat beat me to it, and his is more pretty.
not all feats are equal. Especially not across all classes.
Wait, wait, arent you the one who keeps claiming its 'balanced?' What does balance mean if not equality?
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 13, 2008 - 9:46AM
#206
|
Date Joined:
Jul 10, 2003
|
What does balance mean if not equality?
The game is not balanced around one class. There are better options for fighters.
TWF is mandatory for rangers
great for rogues
ok for fighters
and not all that great for other melee classes.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 13, 2008 - 9:48AM
#207
|
Date Joined:
Jun 25, 2008
|
Wait, wait, arent you the one who keeps claiming its 'balanced?' What does balance mean if not equality?
Balance is only important when it's his favorite class that is gimped or when his favorite classes "role" is being infringed upon.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 13, 2008 - 9:58AM
#208
|
Date Joined:
Jun 13, 2008
|
Make your own and forget about balance. As long as the powers match roughly with other classes in the same role, a few points here and there won't matter as long as everyone is having fun.
I don't want to design my own. Currently working on my homebrew, houserules and other things to worry about a class my players may or may have fun with. If there is a fan based one, I'll look at it.
Wait, wait, arent you the one who keeps claiming its 'balanced?' What does balance mean if not equality?
Feats are balanced to each compared to the tier they exist on (and other factors based on prerequisites and the like) not to the class they may or may not work with. If not then every feat would need further qualifiers or have a class/race prerequisite.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 13, 2008 - 10:01AM
#209
|
Date Joined:
Jan 20, 2002
|
I'll admit that TWFing as is is decent for a Rogue, if you have the spare feat. Weapon Focus will get you more damage at 11th level, Backstabber will get you more damage if you always attack from flanking or hiding. If you're a brutal rogue you could pick up shield proficiency if you wanted the AC from TWD.
Someone mentioned fighter versatility? Aside from the versatility of having a thrown weapon in hand (debunked by referencing Quick Draw, I believe), are you speaking of the versatility to have two different weapon encounter fighter powers? I hope you're staying with similar stat weapons, like Hammers or Axes, so you're not stretching your ability bonuses around. I'm not really sure how great of an ability this is.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 13, 2008 - 10:04AM
#210
|
Date Joined:
Jan 20, 2002
|
Feats are balanced to each compared to the tier they exist on (and other factors based on prerequisites and the like) not to the class they may or may not work with. If not then every feat would need further qualifiers or have a class/race prerequisite.
I'll play devil's advocate here. Blade Opportunist proves that feats meant for a specific weapon group, damage type, class, or race are better than general feats (comparing Blade Opportunist to Combat Reflexes). That's probably their excuse for TWFing not being as strong as Weapon Focus, or that TWFing's bonus will stack with Weapon Focus.
I still feel the biggest issue with TWFing is when players look at it and say "really, is that it?". A feat shouldn't look underwhelming compared to another feat right next to it (Weapon Focus in this case).
|
|
|
