attacking with two weapons

[Wolfgar]

I have read the section in the DMG on this as well as the thread on Dragons Foot www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=12938 and I was wondering what are our house rules other than the "to hit" adjustments. If I am using a sword and a dagger and I get 3/2 attacks per melee round does that mean three attacks every two rounds with the sword and three attacks every two rounds with the dagger, or just three attacks every two rounds with the sword and one attack a round for the dagger. If it is the former how are the attacks distributed?

Further as noted in the thread on page 63 of the DMG

A 12th level fighter is allowed attack routines twice in every odd numbered melee round.

Currently we do the two attack round on every even numbered round. Should we change this?

Also I haven't read anywhere about damage done by the second weapon. Is this assumed to do the normal damage and have all of the normal bonuses? Does that include ranger bonuses?

[Dead Greyhawk]

otto said:

I have read the section in the DMG on this as well as the thread on Dragons Foot www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=12938 and I was wondering what are our house rules other than the "to hit" adjustments. If I am using a sword and a dagger and I get 3/2 attacks per melee round does that mean three attacks every two rounds with the sword and three attacks every two rounds with the dagger, or just three attacks every two rounds with the sword and one attack a round for the dagger. If it is the former how are the attacks distributed?

Three attacks every two rounds with the sword (primary hand), one attack every round with the dagger (secondary hand). Regardless of specialization and level, an off-hand weapon gives only one extra attack per round. IMO, this makes it more parallel with a shield, which provides the same degree of protection regardless of level and is what the second weapon is replacing.

Further as noted in the thread on page 63 of the DMG

A 12th level fighter is allowed attack routines twice in every odd numbered melee round.

Currently we do the two attack round on every even numbered round. Should we change this?

If you'd prefer it the other way, that's fine with me. It means that you (and your opponents) get additional attacks duing the first round of combat, generally when movement takes place. So long as we are consistant, I don't have a particular preference.

Also I haven't read anywhere about damage done by the second weapon. Is this assumed to do the normal damage and have all of the normal bonuses? Does that include ranger bonuses?

Your off-hand weapon would get strength and magical bonuses, but not specialization (imo) especially since I'm not allowing the off-hand to get a specialization bonus with respect to additional attacks. We'll have to have a robust discussion regarding ranger bonus. Additionally, do rangers get a ranger bonus when unarmed and fighting giants? (Otto's punch would be pretty bad ass.)

I'm trying to avoid the double specialized hand-axe or dagger wielder from having ridiculous rates of attack and damage should they dual wield. Perhaps I err too much on the side of caution. If you think I do, I'm happy to adjust the house rules.

[Wolfgar]

I guess I am trying to decide when it would ever make sense to use a second weapon. If all you can do is an extra 1d4 (1d3) with bonuses at most once a round this would never seem to outweigh the advantage of using a magic shield. The shield will in general save you more in damage than you can inflict using the dagger.

I wrote some equations and played with some numbers and the only time it makes sense is if your opponent's AC is bad.

expected damage = (no of attacks) * (average damage per hit) * (chance to hit)

average damage per hit = average weapon damage + strength bonus + proficiency bonus + magic bonus + extra bonus

chance to hit = min(level + opp. armor - opp. shield + strength bonus + weapon magic + proficiency - to hit adj - 1, 19) / 20

For example, if Otto at 8th level attacked himself (+1 plate, +2 shield) using either one or two weapons the one weapon version would do on average 18.75 points of damage per round, while the two weapon version would do only 13.8 assuming 1 attack a round with the dagger and only 14.45 with 3/2 attacks a round with the dagger. Basically when fighting oneself until the chance to hit starts to be capped by 19 does it make sense to switch to using a second weapon.

Now it is not likely that he will be attacking himself so if for example he was attacking a hill giant (AC 4, HD 8) with these two options. He would do 34.85 with two sword attacks per round and 37.05 with two sword and one dagger attack per round. The hill giant conversely could expect to do 4.05 and 2.7 with and without shield respectively. In this case it would seem the two weapons were better. Of course this is just a single giant. Assume there were 2, then first option is better. Or if these were stone giants with AC 0 then the first option is always better even with 3/2 attacks with the dagger.

So in summary, if there is more than one opponent then it is always better to have a shield unless the opponents have a very small chance of hitting you, do very little damage per attack or have such low AC that you automatically hit them and you are likely to kill them with one hit. The 3/2 attack in most cases may be the only reason to attack with two weapons.

[Friedrich]

If Friedrich attacked with a hand-axe in his off-hand would weapon specialization bonuses apply for both hands(assuming he used the black iron axe in his primary hand).

I'm considering trying this if I roll well enough to get 17 Dex next level (I think I have 16. 70's as of now).

1. Would Friedrich be specialized when attacking with his off hand using a hand axe?

2. If so, would increased rate of attack apply as well?

[venger]

You only get one additional attack with an off-hand.

I would consider giving you the specialization bonus though.

[Friedrich]

Ok, thanks. Definately something to think about...

[Wolfgar]

One suggestion is that you would need to take an additional proficiency to extend your specialization to the offhand. And that at best it could be single specialized.

You could argue though that a hand-axe is to a battle-axe as a dagger is to a sword. And then all sword specialists could get their specialization bonuses when using a dagger in the offhand. But sword specialists would need to spend a proficiency on dagger as well as one to extend the specialization.

Regardless, you still get your strength bonus with the offhand. Of course if you believe my posting in this thread from 5 years ago(!) it is better to use a magic shield instead of attacking with two weapons when faced with more than one opponent. I'll have to review that for high DEX and extended specialization.

[Ginger]

I think I agree with the original notion that we should discourage dual-wielding hand axes. Otherwise it seems like that combination would be extremely overpowering.

[venger]

He's entitled to an off-hand attack in addition to his regular attack routines if he foregoes a shield.

I'm not sure an additional +3 damage to that attack is really cause for concern. But having it cost additional weapon slots is a good idea.

Furthermore at 7th level double-specialized fighters wanting 2/1 attack routines will need to train with an advanced weaponmaster @ cost.

An advanced weaponmaster might also be able to teach facets of basic weapon specialization (attack routines, + to hit/damage) to those otherwise unable to learn it.