Two-weapon warrior archetype: Twin Blades

[Celtavian]

Twin Blades (Ex)

At 5th level, a two-weapon warrior gains a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls when making a full-attack with two weapons or a double weapon. This bonus increases by +1 for every four levels after 5th.

This ability replaces Weapon Training 1.

This ability seems lame. You get your normal weapon training bonuses when fighting with two weapons and taking a full attack action. But you get nothing when making a standard attack with both weapons when doing the following:

Doublestrike (Ex)

At 9th level, a two-weapon warrior may, as a standard action, make one attack with both his primary and secondary weapons. The penalties for attacking with two weapons apply normally.

This ability replaces Weapon Training 2.

Equal Opportunity (Ex)

At 13th level, when a two-weapon warrior makes an attack of opportunity, he may attack once with both his primary and secondary weapons. The penalties for attacking with two weapons apply normally.

This ability replaces Weapon Training 3.



So no bonuses when making AoOs or a single standard action attack with both weapons. So you only get the bonus when in position to make a full attack.

Is that how it is adjudicated? Seems like a lot to give up when you can build a two-weapon fighter without taking the Two-weapon warrior archetype and pick multiple weapons to be good at and get their bonus all the time. The weapon training bonus alone cancels out fighting with two one-handed weapons and still gives you +4 damage.

And you don't lose armor mastery or the ability to get other weapons like a bow or thrown weapons with later weapon training.

Is the Two-weapon archetype so poorly designed that it is better to build a two-weapon fighter without the archetype?

The only advantage is once your 19th level and get a ton of AoOs when people hit you, but you don't get a bonus on attack and damage on your AoOs. But other than that, there is no real advantage to the Two-weapon warrior archetype over building a two-weapon fighter using the standard fighter abilities.

Anyone see the advantage of choosing the Two-weapon Archetype over the standard fighter using feats to be a great two-weapon fighter?

 

[pawsplay]

The problem with just about any fighter archetype is that you are basically either replacing minor features or replacing bonus feats. Is it worth it? Well, two attacks as a standard action is something most characters can't do, and in certain situations, the math could be very advantageous. Also, this particular archetype isn't married to any particular combo of two weapons. Assuming the character decides to go with lighter armor, as he loses armor training, and needs a decent Dex for the two-weapon feats, you're probably looking at a shift toward offense, which can be advantageous.

So... you have a character that can gain extra damage multiple times in a round, using a variety of weapons. That means you can mix and match bane weapons, energy damage, maybe a dip into Rogue for sneak attack, and so forth. I wouldn't say it's particularly better, but it's certainly a solid option for two weapon fighting.

 

[Celtavian]

re

The Two-handed weapon archetype gives clearly powerful advantages that make what you give up tolerably. At 19th level you get a power that almost guarantees a crit once a round. With weapons like a Greataxe and a Scythe, that is a huge advantage. And with advantages like Double Power Attack and Backswing and the other one, you almost always have double strength bonus on damage. Which is substantial for a class that focuses almost solely on strength.

But Two-weapon fighting requires a 19 dex. So not only do you lose out on being able to focus on Strength with two-weapon fighting, thus lowering your damage output. You also have limitations on when you get bonuses on your attacks.

Seems like Pathfinder is giving Two-weapon fighting a raw deal and empowering Two-hander Fighting much like 3E did.

I was hoping Pathfinder would make Two-weapon fighting on par with Two-hander fighting again. So far that doesn't seem to be the case. Two-weapon fighting is a little better than 3E, but it doesn't seem on par with the Two-hander fighters. They're still the damage kings in most of the most important encounters.

 

[Njall]

The Two-handed weapon archetype gives clearly powerful advantages that make what you give up tolerably. At 19th level you get a power that almost guarantees a crit once a round. With weapons like a Greataxe and a Scythe, that is a huge advantage. And with advantages like Double Power Attack and Backswing and the other one, you almost always have double strength bonus on damage. Which is substantial for a class that focuses almost solely on strength.

But Two-weapon fighting requires a 19 strength. So not only do you lose out on being able to focus on Strength with two-weapon fighting, thus lowering your damage output. You also have limitations on when you get bonuses on your attacks.

Seems like Pathfinder is giving Two-weapon fighting a raw deal and empowering Two-hander Fighting much like 3E did.

I was hoping Pathfinder would make Two-weapon fighting on par with Two-hander fighting again. So far that doesn't seem to be the case. Two-weapon fighting is a little better than 3E, but it doesn't seem on par with the Two-hander fighters. They're still the damage kings in most of the most important encounters.

Uhm, going by the pfsrd ( I don't have the APG, and I'm not really into pathfinder, so correct me if I'm wrong ), the TWF archetype gains a class ability named deadly defense at level 19. Now, there's a reason Karmic Strike and Robilar's Gambit were in each and every optimized fighter build in 3.5, and this stuff is even better ( no AC penalty, can attack with your offhand thanks to equal opportunity ); combine it with combat reflexes and trying to hit you after you've made a full attack is going to be a suicidal move...your average melee monster might end up eating 6-10 AoOs if he attacks the TWF'er. Sure, you're not going to add your attack and damage bonus from twin blades to AoO, but who cares? It's not like you'll have trouble hitting with an AoO at level 19... it's essentially free damage. A crapton of free damage ( unless your opponent is attacking you from reach, but you're probably going to be enlarged by level 19, so it should be a nonissue...).

Also, while they lose Armor Training, they gain a scalable AC bonus against melee attacks. Now, that's probably worse than Armor Training, being only useful against melee attacks and being triggered by a full attack, but the bonus is slightly higher ( +5 at level 19 rather than +4), and I noticed that you didn't mention it at all despite the fact that it's probably going to come into play pretty often, so it's not like they're taking your Armor Training away and leaving you without any defensive capabilities whatsoever.

Lastly, a regular fighter that uses 2 one handed weapons will be 2 points behind this dude when making a full attack ( and full attacking is where TWF really shines ), and when he cannot make a full attack he's going to attack once as opposed to twice, so the twin-blade fighter is going to deal slightly more damage when full attacking ( +2 to hit ) and way more damage when limited to a standard action.

So, to summarize: as I said, I'm not really into pathfinder, so you could be right and this archetype could be a failure, but in your OP you're pretty much keeping its capstone and its defensive bonus out of the equation, and you seem to be ignoring the fact that, while you're limited to full attacks, that's what you're going to do 70% of the time anyway.

 

[Celtavian]

re

The defensive bonus seems to work against the 19th level ability. Otherwise, it isn't bad, but not worth giving up Armor Mastery when you can wear heavy armor with minimum 19 dex and all of it added to your armor class. And you get 5/- DR. I would think Armor Master and DR are better than the defensive bonus.

I noted the 19th level ability is pretty nice. Though you do have to be hit to get your AoOs, which also limits the archetype since when he is full attacking his AC is high given his dex and defensive bonus.

It puts a lot of limitations that are counterable on the build and makes the Two-hander build far superior since it has no limitations that the opponent can take advantage of tactically.

And let's look at BAB at 20th level with say Two-battleaxes without magic:

+20 + 4 Full attacking +2 double spec +2 str (because you have to spend highest roll on dex to get 19) = +28 when full attacking

+20 +2 doubl spec +2 str = +24 on AoOs and single attacks


Versus two weapon-fighter normal

+20 BAB +4 weapon training +2 double spec +2 str -4 (two equal sized weapons) = +24 on every attack

Seems the to hit math does favor the Two-weapon fighter. The damage would be less by four per attack on AoOs and single attacks. Which would probably be tolerable.

So maybe the build is better than I thought. I'll have to do the math on the defensive side to to see if it is worth giving up Armor Mastery and DR. And if I used two weapon fighting to throw items, do I get the same bonus is something I'll check to.

 

[Njall]

The defensive bonus seems to work against the 19th level ability. Otherwise, it isn't bad, but not worth giving up Armor Mastery when you can wear heavy armor with minimum 19 dex and all of it added to your armor class. And you get 5/- DR. I would think Armor Master and DR are better than the defensive bonus.


I noted the 19th level ability is pretty nice. Though you do have to be hit to get your AoOs, which also limits the archetype since when he is full attacking his AC is high given his dex and defensive bonus.

Well, DR 5/- is a decent perk at most at level 20... it's not that good.
Armor Training is nice, though, but, in the end, you're going to have the same AC against melee attacks with the defensive bonus. So who cares if it comes from Armor Training or Defensive Flurry? You can wear heavy armor anyway, you're not limited to light armor just because your dex is high.
Furthermore, your AC is not going to be higher than a regular fighter's even with Defensive Flurry, because your dexterity bonus is still limited by the armor you're wearing. So, you're going to be slightly behind a fighter if you wearlight armor, on par with him if you wear medium armor or slightly ahead ( 1 point unless the fighter is using a shield ) if you're in heavy armor, so deadly defense will be put to good use anyway, usually.

It puts a lot of limitations that are counterable on the build and makes the Two-hander build far superior since it has no limitations that the opponent can take advantage of tactically.

I'm having trouble following you here. I thought your problem was that the archetype might be worse than a regula fighter armed with 2 weapons, not that it was worse than the THF archetype.
Anyway, what are these limitations? He's less mobile than the THF at level 19+, but aside from that, I don't see a lot of tactical limitations that your opponent could exploit ( well, aside from the fact that you're a melee fighter, but that's a problem that the THF is going to face as well ).

And let's look at BAB at 20th level with say Two-battleaxes without magic:

+20 + 4 Full attacking +2 double spec +2 str (because you have to spend highest roll on dex to get 19) = +28 when full attacking

+20 +2 doubl spec +2 str = +24 on AoOs and single attacks


Versus two weapon-fighter normal

+20 BAB +4 weapon training +2 double spec +2 str -4 (two equal sized weapons) = +24 on every attack

Seems the to hit math does favor the Two-weapon fighter. The damage would be less by four per attack on AoOs and single attacks. Which would probably be tolerable.

So maybe the build is better than I thought. I'll have to do the math on the defensive side to to see if it is worth giving up Armor Mastery and DR. And if I used two weapon fighting to throw items, do I get the same bonus is something I'll check to.

Uhm, I believe you're forgetting a -2 penalty for the twin-blade warrior here... improved balance says that

he may use a one-handed weapon in his off-hand, treating it as if it were a light weapon with the normal light weapon penalties

so his AB at level 20 would be +26 rather than +28. Anyway, he's 2 points ahead of the regular fighter, so...
Lastly, while browsing the pfsrd, I came across a feat called dervish dance, that lets people use their dex mod for attack and damage rolls when using a scimitar one handed... seems perfect for this archetype.

 

[Celtavian]

re

I read Dervish Dance. I believe it only gives the bonus to single scimitar users.

Relevant text from feat.

You cannot use this feat if you are carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand.

The +28 comes from the following:

Perfect Balance (Ex)

At 15th level, the penalties for fighting with two weapons are reduced by an additional –1 for a two-weapon warrior. This benefit stacks with improved balance. If he is using a one-handed weapon in his off hand, treating it as a light weapon, he uses the normal light weapon penalties.

This ability replaces Armor Training 4.

How I read perfect balance is you get the further -1 for a total of -2 and you can use a one-handed weapon in your off hand like a light weapon. And the -2 applies as though the one handed weapon were a light weapon completely eliminating the off hand penalty.

I think that is what is intended. Because the previous balance allows you to alternatively use an off hand weapon as a light weapon instead of taking the -1 penalty. Whereas Perfect Balance has no such limitation.

So I think it is intended that you do the following:

One handed equals light weapon causing -2 on main and off hand attacks

Perfect balance reduces penalties for two-weapon fighting by total of -2.


Meaning no penalty for fighting with one handed off-hand weapon. Which offsets the -4 you would have received as a normal two-weapon fighter fighting with a one handed weapon.

Thus you end up being +28 when full attacking at 15th level.

 

[Njall]

I read Dervish Dance. I believe it only gives the bonus to single scimitar users.

Relevant text from feat.

You cannot use this feat if you are carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand.

Damn, you're right. I totally missed the reference to a weapon

The +28 comes from the following:

Perfect Balance (Ex)

At 15th level, the penalties for fighting with two weapons are reduced by an additional –1 for a two-weapon warrior. This benefit stacks with improved balance. If he is using a one-handed weapon in his off hand, treating it as a light weapon, he uses the normal light weapon penalties.

This ability replaces Armor Training 4.

How I read perfect balance is you get the further -1 for a total of -2 and you can use a one-handed weapon in your off hand like a light weapon. And the -2 applies as though the one handed weapon were a light weapon completely eliminating the off hand penalty.

I think that is what is intended. Because the previous balance allows you to alternatively use an off hand weapon as a light weapon instead of taking the -1 penalty. Whereas Perfect Balance has no such limitation.

So I think it is intended that you do the following:

One handed equals light weapon causing -2 on main and off hand attacks

Perfect balance reduces penalties for two-weapon fighting by total of -2.


Meaning no penalty for fighting with one handed off-hand weapon. Which offsets the -4 you would have received as a normal two-weapon fighter fighting with a one handed weapon.

Thus you end up being +28 when full attacking at 15th level.

I don't know, I don't really think it works this way, considering that the ability states "...he uses the normal light weapon penalties", and that the normal penalty for fighting with a light weapon in your off-hand is -2.
I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree here, though, because, barring errata or official clarification, it can be interpreted both ways.

 

[Celtavian]

re

It can be interpreted both ways.

But I think the text in the first balance entry is key to reading the second. It removes the word alternatively. And seems to imply that wielding a one handed weapon in the off hand is like a light weapon in addition to the penalty reductions.

You are giving up a massive amount of defense to gain a powerful offense.

I did the math on the defensive advantages of Armor Training and Mastery.

Let's say +4 Full Plate Armor straight up with a 20 Dex.

Normal Fighter's defense:

AC 28 (13 armor, 5 dex) Touch: 15 FF: 23

DR 5/- for Armor Mastery

Two-weapon warrior

AC 24 (13 armor, +1 dex) Touch 11 FF 23

Armor against melee attacks when full attacking 29. Not ranged attacks touch or otherwise.

No DR

That's a pretty big reduction in DR.


You can mitigate some of the defensive loss with Mithril Fullplate. You can also boost DR to 8/- with Adamantine Full Plate with the regular fighter.


But after doing the math, the Two-weapon Warrior is looking a lot better. When you start compounding bonuses for weapon enhancements like Holy or Flaming or Burst weapons, the two attacks for AoOs and Standard action attacks far exceeds the +4 bonus from Weapon Training.

Two-weapon warriors start to become powerful offensive machines. That still hit as well as the regular warrior. More chances to crit along with more chances to miss of course.

The two-weapon fighting does work with thrown weapons. Nowhere does it say melee only. So you could load up on darts or thrown daggers or some other thrown weapon and with quickdraw do a ton of damage from range. It will cost you substantially more money than a bow to do this, but it could still make you a fairly effective ranged attacker with thrown weapons and 6 or 7 attacks with full str bonus, full attack two weapon bonus, and whatever type of daggers or thrown weapons you can get.

I'm now tempted to give up the defense to try this archetype to be a powerful offensive machine. I could be brutal. Though Two-weapon fighting will always take much longer to build to a powerful level unlike Two-hander fighting which is strong out of the gate and stays strong all the way up.

That's the disadvantage of two-weapon fighting. Takes a long time to shine compared to Two-hander fighters and archer types. Even takes longer than the sword and shield types. But might be real powerful once I get to high level and we usually do reach 15th plus when we put our minds to it. So I might try it.

 

[pawsplay]

TWF doesn't have to be weak at low levels, but it is harder to make the big numbers. We recently had a thread over in Legacy at 3.5 and even there, which disfavors the TWF fighter to a greater degree, the TWF fighter still managed to hold their own at every level range.