Is TWF as bad as it looks?

Remove all ads!

Hey there,

I just did some math on Two-Weapon-Fighting vs. Two-Handed and noticed in the process that your off-hand attacks don't progress with BAB. Accordingly TWF doesn't look very impressive compared to TH.

Here's what a mid-game comparison could look like. As an my "average" weapons I used a +3 enchantment with +1d6 random elemental damage. Sample 1 dual-wields Bastard Swords while Sample 2 uses a Greataxe. Sample 2 gets to use PA4 because Sample 1 receives a -4 To Hit penalty. Both characters are assumed to have 3 attacks per round and 22 Strength.

Sample 1: (1d10 +3 Enchant +2 WS +6 Strength +1d6 elemental)*3 +(1d10 +3 Enchant +2 WS +3 Strength +1d6 elemental) = 49-105 damage per round

Sample 2: (1d12 +3 Enchant +2 WS +9 Strength +4 Power Attack +1d6 elemental)*3 = 60-111 damage per round

Results:
Min Damage: 2>1
Max Damage: 2>1
Required Feats: 5 vs 3 => 2>1
To Hit: Sample 1 makes 2 out of 4 attacks at his max attack bonus so that roughly 50% of the DPR is very likely to hit. Sample 2 only hits 33% of his DPR very likely. => 1>2


These are obviously flawed and idealized calculations but that also means things could get even worse for TWF. For example, more attacks per round make the additional off-hand attack even less impactful. On the other hand, the lower your BAB, the more useful the extra attack gets.

To make a long story short, is it worth it?

 

I think it's only worth it for enchanted weapons with special effects (golden heart of ..).

 

Ya, might also be worth it for certain guaranteed drops I guess. A Paladin can dual-wield Holy Avenger + Short Sword of Brilliance for example, even in normal mode.

 

... why? The additional -2 penalty on all attacks is not worth the +2 damage over wielding a light weapon in off-hand. If anything, you're better off using PA and normal weapons.

It's like idiots monkey gripping two-handed swords just for the cool factor. Missing every attack gets old pretty fast.

Also, what exactly are the "required" feats in each case? Ambidexterity, and TWF in the first case (plus EWP for a useless feat tax). And... Power Attack in the second case? Where did you get 5 vs. 3?

Obviously, TWF is gonna have a larger feat overhead either way, I'm just curious.

But to answer the question, it is generally accepted that two-handed weapons are the way to go in 3E unless you have special effects that trigger on each hit (i.e. a rogue's sneak attack).

 

Why Bastard Swords? Because they are the highest single handed damage weapons in the game. I actually used them to make things a bit more favorable for TWF. With full Fighter BAB you can afford the -4 AB penalty. If you use a small weapon off-hand you need even more feats to compete(WF:SB, WS:SB, and PA if you want to trade the +2 AB you get for additional damage)

Why 5v3? WP, WF, WS, AD, TWF vs WF, WS, PA.

Thanks for pointing it out though, I forgot to add the bonus damage from Weapon Specialization to my calculation.

 

You seem to be mistakenly under the impression that weapon damage dice actually matter. Here's a hint: They don't unless you have some way of substantially increasing your (weapon's) size category. In PnP, it can make the difference between 8d6 and 12d6 points of damage. In IWD2, diddly squat. You're just wasting a feat on Exotic Weapon Proficiency when you could just as easily use a martial or simple weapon and use that feat for Power Attack.

Disregarding the fact that there might not be any good ones in the game, using two short swords would be more efficient.

 

You seem to mistakenly under the impression that your opinion is a universal truth. Using Bastard Swords instead of Short Swords is a +4 max damage or +2 average damage. No more, no less. Everyone has to decide for themselves if that difference "matters" or not.

If anything the -2 to hit penalty for BS vs SS doesn't matter because your buffed up frontliners will be at 100% chance to hit anyway.

 

It is though. A feat for +2 to damage is a bad tradeoff. That goes for Weapon Spec too, of course. Not that there's a whole lot of better choices in IWD2, and fighters have feats to spare.

I admit that I am entirely unsure whether that's possible in IWD2. For instance, it's easy in ToEE with Fragrach and Scather which literally always hit, so it's worth investing into bastard swords. But this is a theoretical case, and as such a -10% chance to hit for +2 damage is horribly inefficient in terms of optimization.

Anyway, going for the weapon with the highest damage die is a typical beginner move in D&D. After the first few levels, the weapon damage dice generally become largely irrelevant since the majority of damage comes from strength, power attack, and other flat damage modifiers.

 

Rather than calculating all possible scenarios, let's compare them as they progress.

Low level: TWF wins due to 2 attacks per round (daggers need not apply). STR bonus is the same for both, you just get 100%+50% for each hand rather than 150% for the single swipe with TH.

Medium level: TWF hits 3 times per round, of which two with maximal attack bonus. TH gets only one unpenalized swipe. STR bonus applies at 250% for TWH and at 300% for TH. Gain some, lose some.

High levels: The use of Power Attack depends much more on enemy AC vs your toHit bonus than your BAB so that you don't risk missing the last low AB swipes. But when you CAN use PA, it also favors TWF due to more attacks to apply it on. However, the STR bonus favors two-handers instead. Once again, a wash.

Epic levels: Both reach the cap at 5 attacks per round (haste assumed), favoring two-handers heavily. However, TWF has the bonus of getting the "last" swipe at full BAB rather than at zero BAB. Unless you have like +25 ToHit from other sources besides BAB, that's still quite a boon for TWF, so the difference remains smaller than you'd think.

Also, IWD2 is rather special in how much raw damage addition you can get via buffs and items. All of that favors TWF until you get to attack rate cap.

 

I beg to differ. +2 damage is as good as it gets for a feat in IWD2. Most other feats are highly situational while WS for example is always beneficial.

Would you say +4 strength is irrelevant? Would you say spells like 'Aid', 'Chant', 'Prayer', 'Recitation' or 'Emotion: Hope' are irrelevant?

Holy Power gives you +4 damage. Hey, why not make it +2 instead? 2 damage more or less don't matter after all. Oh, wait...

If you do the math you will notice that a flat +2 damage is even better than the beloved Improved Critical feat in many scenarios.

Anyway, thinking that small bonuses do not matter is a typical beginner move in D&D. It's easy to overlook that these things stack. If +2 damage coming from Weapon Specialization or another Weapon Type didn't matter, the same logic would have to apply to *all* sources of +2 damage.

When it comes to the trade-off between AB and damage you might have point but this is again highly situational. If you are below 100% to hit, +damage loses to +AB in most cases. But then again, assuming that you are *always* below 100% to hit would make PA a pretty useless ability for example.


Back on topic: Sir Rechet pretty much nailed it I think. Maybe my initial wording was a bit misleading. TWF isn't bad by any means, it's just less powerful than I expected considering it's so heavy on the feat-side.

 

Ok, I give up. What is this "PA" you guys keep referencing? I thought it was Power Attack, but from the context it might be something else.

 

It's Power Attack ;D

 

Sir Rechet summed it up nicely. I was going to say that maths aren't as relevant as the weapon availability and their bonuses, but I was wrong.

I personally favour TWF because I love having more bonuses.

 

Weapon availability is also a factor in that you can find several +2 one-handed weapons before you find your first +2 two-hander. By the same reason, all three readily available +5 weapons before chapter five (Short sword of sure striking +1, Club of Disruption and Brilliant Short sword +5) are one-handed.

 

Other than the rare times you need something better than a +1 weapon to hit something, the sword of sure striking isn't a true +5 weapon, as it doesn't give the BAB bonus or damage bonus. It only is +1bab and +1 to damage, not +5.

For most foes, a +2 weapon is better than that sure striking short sword.

Just thought I'd point it out, since that extra to-hit and extra damage is often important.

 

True. Sure striking is seldom a deciding factor, but those three weapons happen to be the only ones besides a few rare ammo that can hurt Iron Golems and several types of Battlesquares mobs prior to Underdark. :-)

 

I'm pretty sure you can hurt anything spawned by battle squares by changing weapon types. Some require blunt damage, others slashing.
Some can be hurt by anything. I can't think of anything that requires piercing damage.

I might be confusing Iron Golems with Ice Golems (champions), but I'm pretty sure you can beat them up with +1 or +2 blunt weapons instead of +5 weapons.

Some enemies can only be hurt by certain types of damage, and others have resistance so they only take half or less from some kinds of damage.

 

Elder Elementals from BS require +3 weapons as well.
Seems like some monsters have percentage resistances on top of the standard x/+y type, for example skeletons only take half damage from anything but bludgeoning.

 

I'd like to add the point that ambidexterity isn't (necessarily) needed at high level (for a character that sometimes uses dual wielding) because the -4 to off hand (without ambidexterity) is only applied to your SINGLE offhand attack at high BAB. There is no Improved, Greater, or Perfect two weapon fighting implemented. Ambidexterity is worth it at low levels in that it might double your attacks (and the extra attack not 'Gimped') but by 11 BAB dual wielding is only adding 1 extra attack to your base 3 and a +4 at highest BAB of the offhand attack is possibly not worth a feat but that depends what other feats are available and the needs of the party and character.

Two Weapon fighting (the feat) on the other hand is needed because you don't want to mess up your main hand attacks in any case and is also the same reason why not to put a non-light weapon in your offhand in most circumstances.