General Discussion

[Yygdrasil]

Re: General Discussion

Am I reading this right? Someone double check my work... because if this is how it works then 2 weapon fighting in Pathfinder is broken as hell.

Start out with the following stats at level 12:
12 STR
17 DEX
12 CON
14 INT
10 WIS
18 CHA

Base Attack Bonus: +9/+4 (2 attacks in a full round action)


Now add the following Feats:

Weapon Finesse: Use DEX instead of STR modifier on attack rolls (+11/+6)
+
Weapon Focus: +1 on attack rolls with the specified weapon (+12/+7)
+
Two Weapon Fighting: Assuming you're using 2 light weapons it reduces the penalty to -2/-2 (+10/+5)

********* Here's where I need clarification *********

If I'm looking at it right, 2 weapon fighting allows for a second attack with your offhand weapon at a penalty to both attacks. As a full round action, a character who normally gets 2 attacks/round now gets 4... because the two-handed fighting feat allows for a second attack off each of the main attacks. So in total he would get 4 attacks at a -2/-2/-2/-2 penalty if both weapons are light. So if I'm reading it right, your full round two handed fighting attack bonus would be (+8/+8/+3/+3)

Now we continue to add another feat:

+
Improved Two Weapon Fighting: Grants you a second attack with the offhand weapon at a -5 penalty...

********* Again with the clarification *********

If I'm reading it right, that means I would get (+8/+8/+3/+3/+3/-2). Am I reading this wrong?

Lets continue to add another Feat:

Improved Critical: Doubles the effective threat range of critical hits for the chosen weapon.

Now what if this whole time I were dual wielding 2 +2 Short Swords. 1d6 Damage with a critical threat range of 18-20. The +2 bonus to the weapons would apply to the attack roll and the damage. So my attack rolls would become (+10/+10/+5/+5/+5/+0) with a critical threat range of 18-20 on each of those 6 rolls.

Damn. Someone double check that for me.

- - - Updated - - -

Edited: I read the critical threat range as 18-20 for a short sword when it is in fact 19-20. Although if you don't mind taking the hit to base damage... a Kukri deals 1d4 damage with an initial threat range of 18-20 that would double to 16-20 with improved critical. I'm going to parse some numbers with a random number generator for a minute to see if 1d6 with 18-20 is better in the long run than 1d4 with 16-20 if both crits multiply by 2/

[Armando]

Re: General Discussion

As a full round action, a character who normally gets 2 attacks/round now gets 4... because the two-handed fighting feat allows for a second attack off each of the main attacks.

Nope.

Normal: If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon.

You only get one extra attack. So you have +10/+5 with the main hand weapon and +10 with the off hand weapon.

So in total he would get 4 attacks at a -2/-2/-2/-2 penalty if both weapons are light.

Only the off hand weapon needs to be light.

I'm going to parse some numbers with a random number generator for a minute to see if 1d6 with 18-20 is better in the long run than 1d4 with 16-20 if both crits multiply by 2/

Don't forget that while you may have a 20% chance to threaten, you still need to pass a another attack roll...so if your hit chance is 50%, only 10% of the attacks you land will be confirmed crits. Your effective crit rate is proportional to your hit chance.

[Yygdrasil]

Re: General Discussion

In the long run... 1d6 damage with critical range of 18-20x2 seems to work out better than 1d4 with 16-20x2.

If a creature's AC is 15 and youre only rolling a 1d20, you'll hit it 5 times out of 20.

If your crit range is 18-20, 2 out of 5 of them should be critical. An average 1d6 roll is 3. 3x2 for each of the 2 criticals totals 12, plus the 9 for the other 3 hits for a total of 21.

If your crit range is 16-20, 4 out of 5 of them should be critical. An average 1d4 roll is 2. 2x4 for each of the 4 criticals totals 16, plus the 4 for the other 1 hits for a total of 20.

If the damage bonuses applied to each weapon would be the same (assume +1), I'm not sure how drastically (if at all) that would play into the ongoing formula... but as an uneducated guess I would assume that such a bonus (if applied equally to each damage roll) would extend the gap between the above examples exponentially. Armando?

- - - Updated - - -

Nope

If I have only 1 attack/round (as I would at level 1), even without Two Weapon Fighting, I'm allowed to take 1 attack with each weapon/round as long as I apply the penalties. Taking Two Weapon Fighting as a feat only reduces the penalty. So I assumed that when I got a second attack/round at level 10 the attack would be like this:

Attack/Round 1nd
Right hand
Left Hand

Attack/Round 2nd
Right Hand
Left Hand

With Improved Two Weapon, it allows for a second attack to be made with the off hand weapon/round.

Assuming I use my a full round attack action then the individual attack rounds would look like this:

Attack/Round 1st
Right Hand
Left Hand
Left Hand

Attack/Round 2nd
Right Hand
Left Hand
Left Hand

Explain why that isn't so in more detail than "no"

[Mezlo]

Re: General Discussion

That's it, I'm going to dual wield crossbows...

[cidbahamut]

Re: General Discussion

That's it, I'm going to dual wield hand crossbows...

Fixed.

[Mezlo]

Re: General Discussion

That's it, I'm going to quad wield hand crossbows...

fixed.

[Armando]

Re: General Discussion

even without Two Weapon Fighting, I'm allowed to take 1 attack with each weapon/round as long as I apply the penalties

I think you're misunderstanding the concept of "round." They're referring to rounds as in turns, not the number of hits you get with your main hand weapon. When the text says you only get 1 attack per round with your offhand weapon, it means you only get 1 attack that turn. Even if you can do 3 hits with your main hand, you only ever get 1 with your off hand.

It's extra clear when you look at Improved Two-Weapon Fighting:

Benefit: In addition to the standard single extra attack you get with an off-hand weapon, you get a second attack with it, albeit at a –5 penalty.

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

[Yygdrasil]

Re: General Discussion

Damn fine print

[Mezlo]

Re: General Discussion

In case you guys can't tell, Yyg is preparing a bad ass dual wielding MF'er to try and rape us next session.

[Firewind]

Re: General Discussion

Or King Orran is a Dual Wielder and he isn't going to be happy to see us back so soon.

[Yygdrasil]

Re: General Discussion

I'm not building one. I was just reading things and that popped up as interesting.

[Firewind]

Re: General Discussion

Funnily enough my original plan for Lili was to have her be a Dual-Wielding Hand Crossbow Rogue. Well that was before we played a few sessions and I think it was you Yyg that put the idea of playing an Arcane Trickster in my head.

Not regretting it one bit though given how you're handling Wizard spell preparation and I can always just go with the "Sneak Attack with Spells that use Attack Rolls" strategy for damage until I get the 10th Level Arcane Trickster class ability that lets me Sneak Attack with any spell. Sneak Attack Meteor Swarms anyone?

[Mezlo]

Re: General Discussion

I'm not building one. I was just reading things and that popped up as interesting.

Orly? Then why did your nose just grow 4 inches and your pants are on fire, HMMMM????

- - - Updated - - -

Sneak Attack Meteor Swarms anyone?

It's funny trying to see this actually happen in real D&D life. So a mob is fighting one of us, Fire sneaks behind him, then to the mobs surprise, "HOLY FUCKING SHIT, THERE'S A SHITLOAD OF METEORS UP MY ASS!!!! HOW THE FUCK DID I NOT SEE OR HEAR THAT COMING?!!??!"

[Armando]

Re: General Discussion

Ok, I lied. I was nowhere near being half-done with my little coding project. If I had to revise my estimate, I'd say I'm 80% done. I've worked out a much better approach that won't require anyone to modify the original source code. Instead, you add modifiers to your character alter his stats. Here's a short example Simple traits or buffs could be implemented in as little 5 lines of code.

I wonder if Effect might be a more intuitive name for the stat-altering objects than Modifier? Any thoughts? I'd really appreciate some outside perspective. I'm considering turning this into an open source project if it's well-received. Was the example code intimidating? Or does it look simple enough that some of you would consider using my code and writing up your own modifiers? If not, would you consider using it if I coded the traits and buffs for you?

[cidbahamut]

Re: General Discussion

I like where this is going. The modifier class you linked looks pretty straight forward to me.