AC bonus for dual wield weapons

[Imhotep]

Except for monk.

[Tyr]

An interesting idea to say the least. I have often hated the way a dual wield seems to pick up permanent penalties. A dual weapon wielder could basically use their weapons as a defense. Hopefully some of my other partners in crime will take a look at this possibility as well.

[bhale187]

I'd have to think about that for awhile, I'm not sure of the best way to implement it without a hak file.

I'd like to see it attached to a feat like imp 2 weapon fighting, but then we'd also have to verify the use of 2 weapons to avoid a player just taking the feat and automatically getting an AC bonus.

[Tino the magnificent]

deff, there could be some exploits if it was atached to feat.......i would say attach it to the weapon itself (if at all possible).... if two weap fighting then ac +/ if not two weap fighting nothing

we all know how effective Drizt was at his defense using two weaps

[ciamhan]

If you're defending with your second weapon, then you shouldn't get any offhand attacks.

[Tempus]

Thats my take as well C. At best, you might get a riposte.

[Tino the magnificent]

ahh, great point sirs......i wonder if parry could be worked into it.....when parry active ac bonus but lose offhand attack/ when parry inactive lose ac bonus but retain offhand attack

[[Karma]]

Parry + AC = meh bonus.

Better if this route to gain a (decent) parry bonus. Better would be gain extra ripostes, but well...you know the drill. Hardcode ftw.

[ciamhan]

We actually started this discussion in the 'Weapon Master Hell" RP thread, so here I am reposting my thoughts:



If I had practiced my lute as much as my weapons, I might be making decent money somewhere, perhaps the court musician on a noble's fine estate. Instead, I know just enough music to make my friend's happy, and enough about weapons to win an occasional tourney.(Then I wake up). No matter that it's one weapon or two, I can Parry many blows and hope for an opening in my enemy's defenses (a lost art, in most fighting disciplines), or I can trust in my Expertise, cautiousness that makes my strikes not always forceful yet likewise gives me more distance and time to avoid a blow.

I have tried using two weapons and have studied the masters. Twin sticks, daggers and kamas seem popular among our friends in the east, while those in the west have tried many things. A hammer or bearded axe in the off-hand historically works well against a man with a shield, for with such you can pull the shield away, leaving him open for your main attack. To carry two of anything bigger than a shortsword has lead many men to defeat, and nobody has ever used two longswords and lived to tell of it. To watch two experts each armed with twin daggers is an especially amazing sight if you are close enough and quick enough to follow the action. Naturally, skill overcomes apparent weapon imbalances. A skilled man with two daggers may easily defeat a less skilled opponent armed with a longsword or even a halberd.

Rapiers are a special case, a pun since two matched rapiers are called "a case." By the time rapiers came along, shields were mostly out of use, except for the smallest of shields called bucklers. I have used two rapiers, and rapier and dagger, but as this type of fighting relies on precise attacks and speed, a large shield that hampers my vision and weighs me down might do me more harm than good. (We all use rapiers and tower shields here, even me )

Unfortunately, the defensive advantage you might think you'd get from having another object out there in front of your body and in the way of incoming steel is negated by the need you now have to think about it, and decide if you should leave it static over your heart, move it to block a stroke, or use it offensively because you see an opening, using your main for defense at the moment. So in the end, it all comes down to training.

Ciamhan

[Tony654]

Is adding offense not the reason for dual wielding? Giving an AC bonus would then seem unfair to warriors skilled in the art of fighting while behind a shield. Why then would we not give them an extra two attacks and call it even?

[mardok]

In Paper and pencil DandD there is a feat called "Two Weapon Defense"
Prereq - Dex 15, Two-Weapon Fighting.

It gives +1 to AC while fighting two handed. Could this feat be implemented?

[bhale187]

Jan 23, 2010 14:26:37 GMT -5 mardok said:

In Paper and pencil DandD there is a feat called "Two Weapon Defense"
Prereq - Dex 15, Two-Weapon Fighting.

It gives +1 to AC while fighting two handed. Could this feat be implemented?

adding a feat requires adding a hakpak for everyone to download, and you could not log in without the hakpak, so basically the answer is no

[Tyr]

The only way to implement anything would be on the weapons creation. The Toad Goad comes to mind. One of the things I would do for those weapons that are not able to focus or specialize in would be adding another +2. Wouldn't solve a WM, but its still something for everyone else.

Two handed weapons can be given the AC, but I have actually played with two weapon fighters and the price they pay is the AC. Just pack lots of heal.

[[Karma]]

Jan 23, 2010 15:11:36 GMT -5 bhale187 said:

Jan 23, 2010 14:26:37 GMT -5 mardok said:

In Paper and pencil DandD there is a feat called "Two Weapon Defense"
Prereq - Dex 15, Two-Weapon Fighting.

It gives +1 to AC while fighting two handed. Could this feat be implemented?

adding a feat requires adding a hakpak for everyone to download, and you could not log in without the hakpak, so basically the answer is no

That's not entirely correct. To add it as an actual feat choice with name etc, it sure is. To apply an effect based on a useless feat (think if has Dirty Fighting for instance), is possible.

[bhale187]

Jan 28, 2010 2:32:04 GMT -5 [Karma] said:

Jan 23, 2010 15:11:36 GMT -5 bhale187 said:

adding a feat requires adding a hakpak for everyone to download, and you could not log in without the hakpak, so basically the answer is no

That's not entirely correct. To add it as an actual feat choice with name etc, it sure is. To apply an effect based on a useless feat (think if has Dirty Fighting for instance), is possible.

If dirty fighting is not a hardcoded feat (haven't checked it), that would be possible, but honestly I don't think it's worth the effort of scripting in the check to see if you are using 2 wps, have the proper 2 wp fighting feats, in order to add 1 ac to a dual weilding fighter.