17 replies to this topic

[Stone Wolf]

Do you mean the two stars rangers get in two weapon style? Fighters and Paladins can just put their prof points in that slot. No need to add a feat from 3E to the game for that. Besides, the attacks are at 0/-2 with 3 stars, so anything other than a +2 to the off hand would give them a bonus to using two weapons over using one.

[T.G.Maestro]

Take a look at this discussion here!
(the part about IA starts with Jinnai's first post, I suggest reading that page through)

[Rathwellin the Bard]

Shurgs.

A Kensai without is still going to have a better THACO in both hands than a Ranger with.

[T.G.Maestro]

And IA should give a bonus for two handed weapons

No. IA has nothing to do with two-handed weapons, neither in BG nor in any other AD&D games. It only affects the fighter's prowes while holding TWO weapons, one in each hand. Take a look at IWD2 for example.

[Jinnai]

My stance is that atleast pure fighters should be able to get it as they are the clean slate when they start and if a fighter trained just using two-weapon style he would eventually outclass a ranger in combat just with two-weapon style if all things were equal and the ranger wasn't using any of his abilities.

However, such focus should restrict heavily what the fighter can take otherwise. Focusing training for a ranger to have other abilities cost him abilities the fighter has and so a fighter who decides that two-weapon style is what he wants should be able to surpass a ranger in it, but will suffer in other fields.

[Rathwellin the Bard]

Jinnai you've made that argument before. Why argue again in another thread?

[Littiz]

Shurgs.

A Kensai without is still going to have a better THACO in both hands than a Ranger with.

Exactly, as Rath said.
The ability portrays only a slightly different attitude: in the end a Kensai's effectiveness (with both hands) is superior anyway.

[maximize]

My stance is that atleast pure fighters should be able to get it as they are the clean slate when they start and if a fighter trained just using two-weapon style he would eventually outclass a ranger in combat just with two-weapon style if all things were equal and the ranger wasn't using any of his abilities.

Its like I said earlier, any fighter, not just kensai, should be able to surpass rangers in any fighting style or weapon because they can reach the absolute maximum in any weapon or style usage.

Another thing I wanted to point out: Blades have IA, so why don't swashbucklers?

[T.G.Maestro]

Its like I said earlier, any fighter, not just kensai, should be able to surpass rangers in any fighting style or weapon because they can reach the absolute maximum in any weapon or style usage.

Fighters are better:

At 21st level PC

Ranger w/ the HLA & specialization
-Base THACO main hand -2 (2.5 attacks)
-Base THACO off hand -2 (1 attack)
-Damage Bonus +2

Fighter w/o it but with GM
-Base THACO main hand -3 (2.5 attacks)
-Base THACO off hand -1 (1 attack)
-Damage Bonus +3

Kensai w/o it but with GM
-Base THACO main hand -10 (2.5 attacks)
-Base THACO off hand -8 (1 attack)
-Damage Bonus +10


Even with the HLA the Ranger is less well off dual wielding. It gets even worse if you have the PnP GM stuff installed via some mod.

****

Another thing I wanted to point out: Blades have IA, so why don't swashbucklers?

Because Blades are significantly better with 2 weapons. Check the Rogue Rebalancing mod as a basis.

[maximize]

I just thought of something for IA. Why don't you make it available to anyone (well, sort of) who can put three slots in two weapon fighting style. Plus, you could have some sort of dexterity requirement, just like in IWD2.

Also, why do blades have this ability and fighters don't if fighters are so much better at that sort of thing than blades?

Fighters are better:

At 21st level PC

Ranger w/ the HLA & specialization
-Base THACO main hand -2 (2.5 attacks)
-Base THACO off hand -2 (1 attack)
-Damage Bonus +2

Fighter w/o it but with GM
-Base THACO main hand -3 (2.5 attacks)
-Base THACO off hand -1 (1 attack)
-Damage Bonus +3

Kensai w/o it but with GM
-Base THACO main hand -10 (2.5 attacks)
-Base THACO off hand -8 (1 attack)
-Damage Bonus +10


Even with the HLA the Ranger is less well off dual wielding. It gets even worse if you have the PnP GM stuff installed via some mod.

That just more evidence that fighters should have it. If they are better at using two weapons than rangers anyway, why don't they get it?

[Feanor]

There also balance reasons, maximize.
BTW, a dexterity requirement for Improved Ambidexterity is a nice idea.

[T.G.Maestro]

a dexterity requirement for Improved Ambidexterity is a nice idea

But not really implementable.

why do blades have this ability and fighters don't if fighters are so much better at that sort of thing than blades?

You look at this thing from the wrong side: fighters ARE way better with two swords, much better than blades and even rangers of the same experience level. IA aims to show something different than greater efficiency with 2 weapons - instead of pure efficiency it shows that the ranger or blade is equally skilled with both arms, something that is not available through learning and practicing, only inborn talent.

[Jinnai]

You look at this thing from the wrong side: fighters ARE way better with two swords, much better than blades and even rangers of the same experience level. IA aims to show something different than greater efficiency with 2 weapons - instead of pure efficiency it shows that the ranger or blade is equally skilled with both arms, something that is not available through learning and practicing, only inborn talent.

But that's not what ambidexiterity is meant. It was simply poor wording that it took TSR/WotC 5 editions to correct, mostly because no one cared to.
As late as 2nd ed option rules there was an acknowledgement that it didn't mean an inborn talent because not every ranger is nessarily good at two weapon fighting and not only rangers are (blades being kits and generally not mentioned so they could be grouped together).
So rangers and blades don't have any special inborn talent in them, atleast in general. An indivisual blade or ranger could be naturally ambidexterious, but so could a generic fighter...hell even a mage.
If what your trying to show is dedication or a more natural fighting style, that is fine to give it to them, but generic fighters have no reason to be singled out on the same bass because they are a blank slate in fighting styles when they start out so they could learn to fight like a ranger does with two weapons equally skilled in each.

[T.G.Maestro]

If somehow we could make it so that IA would only be selectable by characters with 3 stars in Two-Wepon Style, I'd support the idea to make it available for fighters too - but since this is not the case, I won't allow characters with absolutely no skill in dual wielding to pick this HLA.
I guess this is completely logical and understandable.

[Mongoose87]

Perhaps when the character achieves the required level, they choose their HLA, then they may through dialogue choose to gain the ability at the cost of an HLA. That could allow for the checking of dexterity or proficiencies, could it not?