Author Topic: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck (& Other Feats) [D&D 3.5, Feats]  (Read 45087 times)

Offline Ziegander

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 692
  • bkdubs123 reborn
    • View Profile
Fighting with Two Weapons
Your character may decide that two sharp sticks are better than one. Which is sound enough logic. When a character fights with two weapons he or she may make an attack with both weapons in place of any of his or her normal attacks during a full attack action. If he or she does, both of those attacks suffer a penalty to their attack rolls depending on the size and weight of the weapon. A one-handed weapon in the main hand suffers a -2 penalty, while a one-handed weapon in the off-hand suffers a -4 penalty. An off-hand weapon in the main hand suffers no penalty, while an off-hand weapon in the off-hand suffers a -2 penalty.

You may carry multiple weapons at the same time, even attack with more than one on your turn, without suffering any penalties to your attack rolls. You only suffer these penalties when, rather than making a single attack during your full attack action with one weapon, you make an attack with each weapon. You may choose to attack with both weapons for each of your attacks in an attack action or for none of your attacks in an attack action, or for any number of attacks in an attack action in between.

Improved Two-Weapon Fighting1
Prerequisites: Dex 15
Benefit: Whenever you make a standard melee attack, a charge attack, or an attack of opportunity with a light or one-handed melee weapon you may also make a melee attack with a light or one-handed weapon held in your off-hand at the same attack bonus. If you do, each of those attacks suffers two-weapon fighting penalties. If you charged, your off-hand attack also receives the +2 bonus to its attack roll.

In addition the penalties to your attacks for fighting with two weapons are reduced by 2 (to a minimum of -0). Remember to add only half your Strength modifier to off-hand damage rolls.

When you fight defensively and with two weapons, if you forgo all of your off-hand attacks for the round you gain a shield bonus to AC equal to the number of attacks forgone in this way.

Two-Weapon Rend1
Prerequisites: Dex 15, Base Attack Bonus +2
Benefit: Once per round, if you hit and deal damage to the same creature with both a main-hand melee and an off-hand melee weapon in the same round that creature suffers 1d6 additional damage per two points of your Base Attack Bonus + 1½ your Dexterity modifier. This additional damage can be bludgeoning, piercing, and/or slashing depending on the types of damage your weapons deal.

Weapon Focus1
Prerequisites: None.
Benefit: Choose a single weapon. You gain a +2 bonus to attack rolls with the chosen weapon.
Special: You may take this feat more than once, but each time you do the benefits apply to a new chosen weapon.

Weapon Specialization1
Prerequisites: Weapon Focus, Fighter Level 4th
Benefit: With the weapon you chose for your Weapon Focus feat you gain a bonus to damage rolls equal to 1/2 your Base Attack Bonus.
Special: You may take this feat more than once, but each time you do the benefits apply to a new chosen weapon.

Bear Claw Style1
Prerequisites: Str 15, Dex 15, Improved Grapple, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Base Attack Bonus +6
Benefit: Once per round, you may initiate a grapple by successfully hitting and dealing damage to a creature with a light or one-handed piercing weapon. If you do, and your grapple check succeeds, then you may may make an immediate extra attack with a second slashing weapon that you carry without suffering the normal two-weapon fighting penalties.

Furthermore, while grappling you may attack with up to two weapons as well as any one-handed piercing or slashing weapon as if it were a light weapon. You suffer the normal -4 penalty while doing so as well as any two-weapon fighting penalties that apply.

Slashing Fury1
Prerequisites: Dex 17, Weapon Focus (Any Slashing Weapon), Weapon Specialization (Any Slashing Weapon), Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Base Attack Bonus +12
Benefit: Once per round, if you hit and deal damage to the same creature with a melee, slashing main-hand weapon and a melee, slashing off-hand weapon in the same round, that creature must succeed on a Reflex save (DC 10 + 1/2 your Base Attack Bonus + your Dexterity modifier) to avoid a grisly wound that prevents that creature from regaining hit points and bleeds it of a number of hit points per round equal to your Base Attack Bonus for the next 5 rounds. Any creatures within 120ft that can see and hear this bloody event must succeed on a Fortitude save (DC 10 + 1/2 your Base Attack Bonus + your Dexterity modifier) or be Nauseated for 1 round. A creature cannot be inflicted by more than one "grisly wound" at a time. A creature that successfully saves against the Nausea effect is immune for 24 hours.

Greater Slashing Fury1
Prerequisites: Dex 17, Weapon Focus (Any Slashing Weapon), Weapon Specialization (Any Slashing Weapon), Slashing Fury, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Base Attack Bonus +16
Benefit: Once per round, if you hit and deal damage to the same creature with both a melee, slashing main-hand weapon and a melee, slashing off-hand weapon in the same round, if that creature is suffering from a grisly wound as dealt by your Slashing Fury feat, that creature must succeed on a Reflex save (DC 10 + 1/2 your Base Attack Bonus + your Dexterity modifier) to avoid being slain outright. This is a death effect, prevented by Death Ward or similar effects, and on a successful save the enemy is immune for 1 round per point that creature's save beat the DC. Regardless of the result of the save, allies of that creature that are within 120ft that can see and hear your attack become Shaken for 1 round (this may escalate other fear effects).

1 - Fighter Bonus Feat.

(click to show/hide)
« Last Edit: September 04, 2012, 05:01:30 AM by Ziegander »

Offline RobbyPants

  • Female rat ninja
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8256
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #1 on: February 01, 2012, 11:12:53 AM »
Interesting. I'm still not a fan of the normal -2 penalty on attack rolls, seeing as how, without feats, the damage is still about on par with two-handed fighting.

I like your TWFing feats. I think the base one is a bit weak, but if I'm reading it, you can make two attacks on a standard action, right? That's a definite improvement. Again, I think the penalty should probably be -0, though.

Do you mind if I use your ITWF version in my project? Veekie suggested something similar, but I like the way yours scales.
My creations

Please direct moderation-related PMs to Forum Staff.

Offline Ziegander

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 692
  • bkdubs123 reborn
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #2 on: February 01, 2012, 11:24:32 AM »
Interesting. I'm still not a fan of the normal -2 penalty on attack rolls, seeing as how, without feats, the damage is still about on par with two-handed fighting.

Well, with two longswords it eeks out a bit more damage. Even more so with weird stuff like monkey grip. I might be convinced to lower the penalties across the board though (to -2/-4, -2/-2, and -0/-2 without the feat and to -0/-2, -0/-0, and -0/-0 with the feat).

Quote
I like your TWFing feats. I think the base one is a bit weak, but if I'm reading it, you can make two attacks on a standard action, right? That's a definite improvement.

The first one allows you to make two attacks on a standard action, on a charge, or even on an attack of opportunity in addition to lowering the penalties by -2. I think that's certainly worth the feat.

Quote
Do you mind if I use your ITWF version in my project? Veekie suggested something similar, but I like the way yours scales.

No, I don't mind.

Offline RobbyPants

  • Female rat ninja
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8256
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #3 on: February 01, 2012, 11:30:05 AM »
Well, with two longswords it eeks out a bit more damage. Even more so with weird stuff like monkey grip. I might be convinced to lower the penalties across the board though (to -2/-4, -2/-2, and -0/-2 without the feat and to -0/-2, -0/-0, and -0/-0 with the feat).

...

The first one allows you to make two attacks on a standard action, on a charge, or even on an attack of opportunity in addition to lowering the penalties by -2. I think that's certainly worth the feat.
Yeah, Monkey Grip could interact with it weirdly. How does Power Attack work? 1:1 like normal? The thing is, if you're putting in a one feat investment to get TWF and you have to take a -2 penalty to hit, it can be easily compared to a THFer using Power Attack, taking -2 to hit for +4 damage.

Even getting the extra attack on a charge or AoO, you're still doing about the same damage as a THFer, with a -2 penalty to boot.

Now, given all the extra ways you can tack on extra damage, it's actually really hard to balance TWFing and THFing beyond base damage. Obviously, extra damage like Sneak Attack favors TWF, and per-attack reductions like Damage Reduction favors THFing.


Quote
Do you mind if I use your ITWF version in my project? Veekie suggested something similar, but I like the way yours scales.

No, I don't mind.
Thanks!
My creations

Please direct moderation-related PMs to Forum Staff.

Offline Ziegander

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 692
  • bkdubs123 reborn
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #4 on: February 01, 2012, 11:34:23 AM »
How does Power Attack work? 1:1 like normal?

Yeah, if you use two one-handed weapons, then you get 1:1 with both as normal.

Quote
The thing is, if you're putting in a one feat investment to get TWF and you have to take a -2 penalty to hit, it can be easily compared to a THFer using Power Attack, taking -2 to hit for +4 damage. [...] Even getting the extra attack on a charge or AoO, you're still doing about the same damage as a THFer, with a -2 penalty to boot.

Hmm... yep, I'm convinced. Lowering the penalties by -2 across the board.

Offline dman11235

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2571
  • Disclaimer: not at full capacity yet
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #5 on: February 01, 2012, 12:04:15 PM »
I'd say that because pf the precision damage thing, TWF does get a significant benefit over THF, even taking into account the DR thing, until you get to crazy levels of DR (20+).  Most DR falls into the lower range, and even then there are ways to get around it (Transmuting comes to mind).  Not only that, but PA multipliers work on TWF too, you know.  The only difference is 1-hand vs 2hand weapon.  Robby, what was your original TWF change?
My Sig's Handy Haversack  Need help?  Want to see what I've done?  Want to see what others have done well?  Check it out.

Avatar d20

Offline Ziegander

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 692
  • bkdubs123 reborn
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #6 on: February 01, 2012, 12:32:03 PM »
I'd say that because pf the precision damage thing, TWF does get a significant benefit over THF, even taking into account the DR thing, until you get to crazy levels of DR (20+).  Most DR falls into the lower range, and even then there are ways to get around it (Transmuting comes to mind).  Not only that, but PA multipliers work on TWF too, you know.  The only difference is 1-hand vs 2hand weapon.  Robby, what was your original TWF change?

Even on DR 5 that's a significant reduction in TWF damage. And Power Attack doesn't even work with light weapons. In my opinion, TWF should be the high damage option. Even with these feats, dealing more damage than THF + Power Attack is difficult.

Let's look at a 1st level Rogue Str 14, Dex 16, with TWF (let's say she gets weapon finesse as a bonus feat just to be fair) compared to a 1st level Barbarian Str 18 with Power Attack. When the Rogue sneak attacks with two Shortswords the action looks like this: +3/+3, 2d6+2/2d6+1. When the Barbarian rages with his Greatsword, power attacking for -1, the action looks like this +6, 2d6+11. Against an AC of 15, the Rogue deals an average adjusted damage of 7.65 per round while the Barbarian deals an average adjusted damage of 10.8. If the Rogue didn't have Weapon Finesse, which is almost a given, then this looks even worse.

Let's look at higher levels, where a 10th level Rogue Str 14, Dex 22 with TWF and Weapon Finesse compared to a 10th level Barbarian with Str 22, Power Attack and Leap attack. When the Rogue sneak attacks with two +2 Shortswords the action looks like this: +15/+15/+10/+10, 6d6+4/6d6+4/6d6+3/6d6+3. When the Barbarian rages with his +2 Greatsword, power attacking for -3, and leap attacks the action looks like this: +17/+17, 2d6+26/2d6+26. Against an AC of 23, the Rogue deals an average adjusted damage of 51.7 per round while the Barbarian deals an average adjusted damage of 49.5. It's taken the Rogue 9 levels or so to pull slightly ahead of the Barbarian and that's counting that Sneak Attack significantly improves damage and ignoring DR. With just DR 5, that brings the Rogue all the way down to 31.7 and the Barbarian to 39.5.

Offline RobbyPants

  • Female rat ninja
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8256
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #7 on: February 01, 2012, 12:52:40 PM »
I'd say that because pf the precision damage thing, TWF does get a significant benefit over THF, even taking into account the DR thing, until you get to crazy levels of DR (20+).  Most DR falls into the lower range, and even then there are ways to get around it (Transmuting comes to mind).  Not only that, but PA multipliers work on TWF too, you know.  The only difference is 1-hand vs 2hand weapon. 
I guess if you have pounce either way, they'll be pretty close on a charge. The only real distinction is you have to pay a feat to get TWF up to par, so you should be getting something for it.

As for SA out-pacing DR, I think you're right. As I mentioned earlier, it's pretty hard to balance TWF and THF. It's not too hard if you set the balance point to be base weapon damage. The problem is that TWF can quickly out-pace THF with stuff like Sneak Attack. You could balance it assuming SA use, but then TWF becomes pathetically weak without it.


Robby, what was your original TWF change?
I covered it in my combat thread. TWFing is in the first post, and I redid the TWF and TW Defense feats in the second post. I hadn't yet rewritten ITWF and GTWF, but I like Ziegander's ITWF version.

Basically, everyone gets the equivalent of the 3.5 TWF feat for free, and the feat now reduces the penalties by 2 and lets you take full iterative attacks. TW Defense gives you a scaling Shield bonus to AC and an immediate action parry option.
My creations

Please direct moderation-related PMs to Forum Staff.

Offline Garryl

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4514
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #8 on: February 01, 2012, 01:18:22 PM »
Fighting with Two Weapons
A character may decide that two sharp sticks are better than one. Which is sound enough logic. When a character wields two weapons he or she suffers penalties to attack rolls depending on the size and weight of the weapons. If wielding a one-handed weapon in his main-hand and a one-handed weapon in his off-hand, the penalties to his attacks are -2 for the main-hand and -4 for the off-hand. If wielding a one-handed weapon in his main-hand and a light weapon in his off-hand, the penalties to his attacks are -2 for the main-hand and -2 for the off-hand. If wielding a light weapon in his main-hand and a light weapon in his off-hand, the penalties to his attacks are -0 for the main-hand and -2 for the off-hand.

What about using a light weapon in the main hand and a one-handed in the off-hand?

Offline Ziegander

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 692
  • bkdubs123 reborn
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #9 on: February 01, 2012, 01:22:02 PM »
Fighting with Two Weapons
A character may decide that two sharp sticks are better than one. Which is sound enough logic. When a character wields two weapons he or she suffers penalties to attack rolls depending on the size and weight of the weapons. If wielding a one-handed weapon in his main-hand and a one-handed weapon in his off-hand, the penalties to his attacks are -2 for the main-hand and -4 for the off-hand. If wielding a one-handed weapon in his main-hand and a light weapon in his off-hand, the penalties to his attacks are -2 for the main-hand and -2 for the off-hand. If wielding a light weapon in his main-hand and a light weapon in his off-hand, the penalties to his attacks are -0 for the main-hand and -2 for the off-hand.

What about using a light weapon in the main hand and a one-handed in the off-hand?

Wait. I can write all of that much, much cleaner. Fixing.

EDIT: There. Now, in answer to your question, a light weapon in the main-hand and a one-handed weapon in the off-hand would result in -0/-4 penalties.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2012, 01:25:35 PM by Ziegander »

Offline dman11235

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2571
  • Disclaimer: not at full capacity yet
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #10 on: February 01, 2012, 01:25:13 PM »
The thing about DR and TWF: I think the goal should be to have it be the same percentage (not same amount) for all fighting styles.  Yes, TWF should be one of the primary damage options.  Along with THF, imo.  Both should be high-damage capable, about the same, just with different methods of achieving the damage.  TWF have lots of attacks to deal damage, THF has high powered, fewer attacks.  One hand should proabbly focus more on defense (whether einhander or sword and board or something else), low number of high quality attacks, medium power.  The utility option, stuff like BC and debilitating strikes.  Ranged has its own advantage (range).  I believe that's the four achetypes: multi-weapon fighting, two handed fighting, one handed fighting, ranged fighting.  I'm not missing any, am I?

EDIT: btw, you need to have a clause that fighting with two or more weapons carries no special rules if you stay within your normal full attack.  Example: BAB 16 character, has armor spikes, shield, longsword, unarmed strike (kick).  He attacks with longsword at +16, shield at +11, armor spikes at +6, and unarmed strike at +1.  No penalty, follows rules for using just a normal full attack.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2012, 01:28:06 PM by dman11235 »
My Sig's Handy Haversack  Need help?  Want to see what I've done?  Want to see what others have done well?  Check it out.

Avatar d20

Offline Ziegander

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 692
  • bkdubs123 reborn
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #11 on: February 01, 2012, 02:23:46 PM »
The thing about DR and TWF: I think the goal should be to have it be the same percentage (not same amount) for all fighting styles.  Yes, TWF should be one of the primary damage options.  Along with THF, imo.  Both should be high-damage capable, about the same, just with different methods of achieving the damage.

I disagree with this, or at least I disagree that TWF and THF should deal about the same amount of damage to the same targets. TWF should deal lots of damage, more than THF can match, but TWF should be inconvenienced by DR, which reduces its damage to somewhere between OHF and THF.

Quote
EDIT: btw, you need to have a clause that fighting with two or more weapons carries no special rules if you stay within your normal full attack.  Example: BAB 16 character, has armor spikes, shield, longsword, unarmed strike (kick).  He attacks with longsword at +16, shield at +11, armor spikes at +6, and unarmed strike at +1.  No penalty, follows rules for using just a normal full attack.

Good point.

Offline Ziegander

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 692
  • bkdubs123 reborn
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #12 on: February 01, 2012, 06:35:18 PM »
Tweaked GTWF and STWF so that they do something more akin to what a massive damage blender ought to be doing, in my opinion.

Offline dman11235

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2571
  • Disclaimer: not at full capacity yet
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #13 on: February 01, 2012, 07:13:02 PM »
But do you agree with the other archetype placements?  And I didn't forget any, did I?  I can dig that alteration to it.  TWF does the most damage but is more suceptible to defenses, including miss chance and DR?  THF becomes the standard, vanilla attack option, TWF becomes situational for the high damage times, OHF is utility, getting most of the feats and stuff that do debilitate the opponent and protect the user/allies, ranged is ranged?

I really like your version of ITWF.  Rend: now it's for everyone!
My Sig's Handy Haversack  Need help?  Want to see what I've done?  Want to see what others have done well?  Check it out.

Avatar d20

Offline Sinfire Titan

  • Hustler 3
  • Retired Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 1443
  • You have one round to give a rat's ass.
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #14 on: February 01, 2012, 08:40:40 PM »
Quote
Superior Two-Weapon Fighting
Prerequisites: Dex 19, Greater Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Two-Weapon Fighting, Base Attack Bonus +12
Benefit: Each time you hit the same creature with both your main-hand weapon and your off-hand weapons in the same round, if that creature is suffering from a grisly wound dealt by your Greater Two-Weapon Fighting feat, that creature must succeed on a Reflex save (DC 10 + 1/2 your Base Attack Bonus + your Dexterity modifier) to avoid being slain outright. This is a death effect, and on a successful save the enemy is immune for 1 round per point that creature's save beat the DC. Creatures within 120ft that can see and hear you attack such a creature become Shaken for 1 round (this may escalate other fear effects).

I'm not too concerned with the level this is obtained at, but others who see it will be. Perhaps making it a 1/encounter thing? As far as encounter ending abilities go, this one is fairly tame (especially on a Rogue, who will have a lower BAB). I'm just hearing so many DMs knee-jerking at the sight of this and banning the whole fix from the campaign because they don't think melee should have nice things. It would be a damn shame.

Also, why target Reflex? Shouldn't it be Fort? Lastly:

Quote
Multiweapon Fighting
Prerequisites: Dex 13
Benefit: Whenever you would make a melee attack with your Primary Weapon you may instead make a melee attack with each of your Secondary Weapons. If you do, the penalties to your Secondary Weapon attacks are reduced by 2 (minimum 0).

When you fight defensively and with more than two weapons the penalty to your attack rolls is reduced by 1 for every attack you choose to forgo.

Just to clarify, a 4-armed PC using a Longsword and 3 Daggers (LS as primary) with a BAB of +16 could make 16 attacks (for with LS, then 4/dagger)?
Concerned about how moderation works here? Please PM this account.

Offline Ziegander

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 692
  • bkdubs123 reborn
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #15 on: February 01, 2012, 09:14:09 PM »
I'm not too concerned with the level this is obtained at, but others who see it will be. Perhaps making it a 1/encounter thing? As far as encounter ending abilities go, this one is fairly tame (especially on a Rogue, who will have a lower BAB). I'm just hearing so many DMs knee-jerking at the sight of this and banning the whole fix from the campaign because they don't think melee should have nice things. It would be a damn shame.

Honestly? I don't even care. It's homebrew. Hardly any DM will ever play with it anyway, so I'd rather leave it at the power level that guys like you and I are comfortable with.

Quote
Also, why target Reflex? Shouldn't it be Fort?

Because Ref vs Death effects are rare, and because a high level warrior should have the kind of skill that says, "if you don't dodge this, you are dead."

Quote from: Sinfire Titan
Quote
Multiweapon Fighting
Prerequisites: Dex 13
Benefit: Whenever you would make a melee attack with your Primary Weapon you may instead make a melee attack with each of your Secondary Weapons. If you do, the penalties to your Secondary Weapon attacks are reduced by 2 (minimum 0).

When you fight defensively and with more than two weapons the penalty to your attack rolls is reduced by 1 for every attack you choose to forgo.

Just to clarify, a 4-armed PC using a Longsword and 3 Daggers (LS as primary) with a BAB of +16 could make 16 attacks (for with LS, then 4/dagger)?

Ooohhhhh. Yeah, that's not what that's supposed to do. I messed it up. You are interpreting what is written wrong, but what is written isn't what I wanted anyway. The way it's written, that PC could get a maximum of 12 attacks (zero with the Longsword, because he trades his Primary attacks for Secondaries), all of them with the Daggers. But that's not really what I wanted. The standard Multiweapon Fighting was just supposed to let a creature trade his Primary attacks on a standard action attack, charge attack, or an attack of opportunity. I just wrote it completely wrong.

Offline dman11235

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2571
  • Disclaimer: not at full capacity yet
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #16 on: February 01, 2012, 09:20:57 PM »
Actually, I am concerned about the level it's obtained at: 12.  I agree that maybe a 1/encounter limit might be called for.  As it is, you will always get it on the second round of combat, and every round afterwards.  At higher levels, you will be able to take out as many creatures per round as one half your attacks possible.  It does HEAVILY promote attacking multiple creatures every round.
My Sig's Handy Haversack  Need help?  Want to see what I've done?  Want to see what others have done well?  Check it out.

Avatar d20

Offline Ziegander

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 692
  • bkdubs123 reborn
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #17 on: February 01, 2012, 09:49:38 PM »
As it is, you will always get it on the second round of combat, and every round afterwards.  At higher levels, you will be able to take out as many creatures per round as one half your attacks possible.  It does HEAVILY promote attacking multiple creatures every round.

Are you sure about that? You have to hit one creature four times, not just that, but twice with your main-hand and twice with your off-hand, for it trigger once. How are you expecting to trigger it every round against multiple creatures?

Offline Sinfire Titan

  • Hustler 3
  • Retired Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 1443
  • You have one round to give a rat's ass.
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #18 on: February 01, 2012, 10:16:25 PM »
As it is, you will always get it on the second round of combat, and every round afterwards.  At higher levels, you will be able to take out as many creatures per round as one half your attacks possible.  It does HEAVILY promote attacking multiple creatures every round.

Read the feats again:

Quote
Each time you hit the same creature with both your main-hand and off-hand weapons in a round that creature must succeed on a Reflex save (DC 10 + 1/2 your Base Attack Bonus + your Dexterity modifier) to avoid a grisly wound that prevents that creature from regaining hit points and bleeds it of a number of hit points per round equal to your Base Attack Bonus for the next 5 rounds. Any creatures within 120ft that can see and hear this bloody event must succeed on a Fortitude save (DC 10 + 1/2 your Base Attack Bonus + your Dexterity modifier) or be Nauseated for 1 round.

Quote
Each time you hit the same creature with both your main-hand weapon and your off-hand weapons in the same round, if that creature is suffering from a grisly wound dealt by your Greater Two-Weapon Fighting feat, that creature must succeed on a Reflex save (DC 10 + 1/2 your Base Attack Bonus + your Dexterity modifier) to avoid being slain outright. This is a death effect, and on a successful save the enemy is immune for 1 round per point that creature's save beat the DC. Creatures within 120ft that can see and hear you attack such a creature become Shaken for 1 round (this may escalate other fear effects).

@Ziegander: It's a lot of setup, but it targets the weakest high-level saving throw and comes online at 12th. By that time, you should be able to hit an AC of 45 with your last iterative at least 45% of the time (depending on optimization).

Then there's those DMs who will go "He killed my BBEG in 1 round!" Optimizers like us expect and understand that Rocket Tag is a part of the system, but even amongst us there are those who want to avoid adding fuel to the fire. I'm not saying that TWFing shouldn't have something like this, but it needs to be controlled a little bit.


A compromise: "If the death effect resolves against an enemy with a CR equal to or less than your character level and the target fails the save, resolve the effects of this feat as normal, but do not expend the use of the death effect." It triggers against Mooks easily, encouraging the PC to spread out his attacks/round and deal with them using weak but fast attacks, and still provides a solid killing blow against the BBEG of the encounter.

Still rocket tag, but aimed more at the weaker enemies.
Concerned about how moderation works here? Please PM this account.

Offline Ziegander

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 692
  • bkdubs123 reborn
    • View Profile
Re: Two-Weapon Fighting That Doesn't Suck [D&D 3.5, Feats]
« Reply #19 on: February 01, 2012, 10:25:40 PM »
Read the feats again:

lol, my bad, I forgot I just changed the feat...  :blush

Quote
@Ziegander: It's a lot of setup, but it targets the weakest high-level saving throw and comes online at 12th. By that time, you should be able to hit an AC of 45 with your last iterative at least 45% of the time (depending on optimization).

Then there's those DMs who will go "He killed my BBEG in 1 round!" Optimizers like us expect and understand that Rocket Tag is a part of the system, but even amongst us there are those who want to avoid adding fuel to the fire. I'm not saying that TWFing shouldn't have something like this, but it needs to be controlled a little bit.

Y'know, I always forget that simply saying, "this is a Death effect" doesn't actually make it blockable by Death Ward. It's supposed to be stopped by a Death Ward. Or by being a Construct/Undead. I'll edit.

Quote
A compromise: "If the death effect resolves against an enemy with a CR equal to or less than your character level and the target fails the save, resolve the effects of this feat as normal, but do not expend the use of the death effect." It triggers against Mooks easily, encouraging the PC to spread out his attacks/round and deal with them using weak but fast attacks, and still provides a solid killing blow against the BBEG of the encounter.

Still rocket tag, but aimed more at the weaker enemies.

I don't think I understand what you're talking about.