Should two-handed weapons be weakened in Conan 2nd?

[Netherek]

I believe you are right, and so I think leave it as is. If you don't like it, nerf for your home game.

 

[sbarrie]

The only aspect to two handed weapons I don't like is the x2 Power Attack bonus. I've found that favours things significantly for two handed weapon users.

So I've removed that perk from Power Attack IMC.

I think the big base damage for two handed weapons is great. With armour reducing damage, every extra point of damage important. Dual weapons may be able to dish out more total damage*, but a two-handed weapon deals more effective damage, and causes more Fort saves.

*Unless you can do sneak attack damage with a total attack, in which case dual weapons do a lot more damage.

 

[Foxworthy]

The only aspect to two handed weapons I don't like is the x2 Power Attack bonus. I've found that favours things significantly for two handed weapon users.

But now you get more of a use out of power attack and two broadswords. To each thier own.

 

[Netherek]

Not to mention you nerf Warswords and any other weapon that can be used in 1 or 2 hands....

Take a guy with Str 13 power attacking with a Warsword. It'll do the same damage in one or two hands, does that make any sense???

 

[Daz]

The modes are ballanced, and noone can get an upper hand in the debate because neither is better - they each have their uses and strengths and weaknesses.

Well so far the debate as been between people who think that two-handers are overpowered and people who think they're balanced. To my knowledge not a single person has said that they're underpowered or that sword and board or two weapon fighting are superior to two-handers.

That should tell you something.

 

[Netherek]

I recall in a D&D campaign that I was in for some time had felt that the bonus to two handers from power attack was to high. What they chose to do was apply x1.5 damage instead of x2. This tones them down a bit, though you do run into the whole two Broads can do more than a Great.

The advantage still remains slightly in the two handers favor, the damage is concentrated in one blow, the penalty is less, and no two weapon attack penalty.

Comparison:

Assume +2 for str, BAB +10, and PA taking a -4 to hit.

Greatsword does 2d10+12 and +8/+3 to hit.

Two Broads does 1d10+8 and 1d10 +6 with +4/+4/-1/-1 to hit.

On average the Great will do more damage, not taking Pen into account. So if you had to reduce something, I'd reduce PA to x1/x1.5.

This would be the most I'd do, and only if PA was a problem, which it hasn't for me. JMHO

 

[Foxworthy]

I recall in a D&D campaign that I was in for some time had felt that the bonus to two handers from power attack was to high. What they chose to do was apply x1.5 damage instead of x2. This tones them down a bit, though you do run into the whole two Broads can do more than a Great.

The advantage still remains slightly in the two handers favor, the damage is concentrated in one blow, the penalty is less, and no two weapon attack penalty.

Comparison:

Assume +2 for str, BAB +10, and PA taking a -4 to hit.

Greatsword does 2d10+12 and +8/+3 to hit.

Two Broads does 1d10+8 and 1d10 +6 with +4/+4/-1/-1 to hit.

On average the Great will do more damage, not taking Pen into account. So if you had to reduce something, I'd reduce PA to x1/x1.5.

This would be the most I'd do, and only if PA was a problem, which it hasn't for me. JMHO

You're right it does reduce average damage down slightly. But Weapon Spec can help offset that.and the AP diffrence is only one point. I use broadswords cause they have the same type of damage die...

so for the sake of overpowerment change it to two war swords. Now fighting with two warswords is way more powerful than fighting with one. Power Attack is balanced between two weapon fighting and two handed weapons. It's the wepaons that aren't balanced.

 

[slaughterj]

so for the sake of overpowerment change it to two war swords. Now fighting with two warswords is way more powerful than fighting with one. Power Attack is balanced between two weapon fighting and two handed weapons. It's the wepaons that aren't balanced.

The other solution is to allow for Power Attack with light weapons (why get it with your fist and not a short sword?!), and possibly also give full STR damage to the off-hand. I know you will say "but then you are getting x1 for the main hand and x1 for the off hand, compared with the 2h character getting only x1.5 for two hands," but if you can swing as well with either hand with two-weapon combat, then what is the basis for a STR penalty to the "off-hand" weapon when there really isn't an off-hand weapon?

 

[Bregales]

*snip*

Now, I'm the slowest reader on the planet, and have only gotten to page 25 of the AE so far in my re-read, but IIRC there are feats like Ambidexterous/erity to compensate for the off-hand penalty.

 

[Trodax]

Bregales, I think slaughterj was referring to the fact that in the rules for fighting with two weapons, there isn't really an "off-hand". You take a -4 penalty with both hands if you fight with two one-handed weapons, and no penalty at all if one of the weapons is light. So those rules don't discriminate at all between your main hand and your off-hand, they are both as good at attacking and the light weapon may be held in either hand (this is a difference from D&D).

The only instance in the rules when which is the off-hand really matters is the fact that you get to add only half your Str bonus to damage with the off-hand.

 

[Krushnak]

theres a feat in hyorias finest that gives your off hand the same str bonus as your main hand. off-hand expert, had pretty low prereqs like dex13 and BAB of 4+

 

[sbarrie]

The only aspect to two handed weapons I don't like is the x2 Power Attack bonus. I've found that favours things significantly for two handed weapon users.

But now you get more of a use out of power attack and two broadswords. To each thier own.

But each broadsword has to penetrate armour seperately, and each counts seperately towards Massive Damage.

Unlike in D&D, a single attack that does 25 points of damage is significantly better than two attacks that do 15 each. Especially if the single attack pierces the target's armour, and one or both of the double attacks don't.

I've found that the massive damage threshold is incredibly important in Conan. For instance, I believe the tulwar is a more dangerous weapon than the greatsword because the extra crits are more likely to cause massive damage saves.

 

[sbarrie]

Not to mention you nerf Warswords and any other weapon that can be used in 1 or 2 hands....

Take a guy with Str 13 power attacking with a Warsword. It'll do the same damage in one or two hands, does that make any sense???

It makes exactly as much sense as it does without the Power Attack feat. The advantage is you now hold the game's largest finesse weapon.

 

[Netherek]

Not all one/two handers are Warswords, the others don't get the benefit of Finesse. So does it still make sense?

And to be honest Two handers should trump when it comes to damage. It's the way it is in RL, and there are better ways to achieve some balance without putting all the favor into Single handers.

To use a two hander you give up a shield which means you will get hit more often than you might otherwise. Two weapons can seriously benefit from Sneak Attacks that far exceed anything Power attack can if both weapons hit.

Do you honestly think the difference between all out strike (power attack) between a Greatsword and Broadsword using average die rolls should be a mere 5 + 1/2 Str bonus difference? Then you end up on the other spectrum, why bother with a two hander when having a shield or second weapon is better?

 

[Netherek]

I recall in a D&D campaign that I was in for some time had felt that the bonus to two handers from power attack was to high. What they chose to do was apply x1.5 damage instead of x2. This tones them down a bit, though you do run into the whole two Broads can do more than a Great.

The advantage still remains slightly in the two handers favor, the damage is concentrated in one blow, the penalty is less, and no two weapon attack penalty.

Comparison:

Assume +2 for str, BAB +10, and PA taking a -4 to hit.

Greatsword does 2d10+12 and +8/+3 to hit.

Two Broads does 1d10+8 and 1d10 +6 with +4/+4/-1/-1 to hit.

On average the Great will do more damage, not taking Pen into account. So if you had to reduce something, I'd reduce PA to x1/x1.5.

This would be the most I'd do, and only if PA was a problem, which it hasn't for me. JMHO

You're right it does reduce average damage down slightly. But Weapon Spec can help offset that.and the AP diffrence is only one point. I use broadswords cause they have the same type of damage die...

so for the sake of overpowerment change it to two war swords. Now fighting with two warswords is way more powerful than fighting with one. Power Attack is balanced between two weapon fighting and two handed weapons. It's the wepaons that aren't balanced.

True, but you need to burn a feat for this as well...

Frankly I'd rule that Warswords don't count as a true one hander, meaning that you could use a Warsword and Broadsword, but not two Warswords. Not saying I'd do this in my game, taking the -4 to hit really is significant in the long run.

 

[slaughterj]

Bregales, I think slaughterj was referring to the fact that in the rules for fighting with two weapons, there isn't really an "off-hand". You take a -4 penalty with both hands if you fight with two one-handed weapons, and no penalty at all if one of the weapons is light. So those rules don't discriminate at all between your main hand and your off-hand, they are both as good at attacking and the light weapon may be held in either hand (this is a difference from D&D).

The only instance in the rules when which is the off-hand really matters is the fact that you get to add only half your Str bonus to damage with the off-hand.

Exactly.

 

[sbarrie]

Not all one/two handers are Warswords, the others don't get the benefit of Finesse. So does it still make sense?

No, but again, it makes just as little sense for a character without the power attack feat right now with the core rules. Not all characters have power attack.

If you want to fix it, let a broadsword wielded two handed do 1d12 damage instead of 1d10, or give the broadsword an extra point of armour piercing when used two handed. Why should the advantage come from a feat?

And to be honest Two handers should trump when it comes to damage. It's the way it is in RL, and there are better ways to achieve some balance without putting all the favor into Single handers.

Removing a feature from a single feat does not put all the favor into single handers. Many players would argue that the favor isn't even close to single handers without a rules tweak.

Do you honestly think the difference between all out strike (power attack) between a Greatsword and Broadsword using average die rolls should be a mere 5 + 1/2 Str bonus difference? Then you end up on the other spectrum, why bother with a two hander when having a shield or second weapon is better?

5 + 1/2 Str bonus gets you that much closer to the magic 20 for massive damage. I've seen many more high hit point PCs, NPCs and critters fall to massive damage then to the traditional hit point attrition.

It's not D&D. The average total damage you deal out in a round by itself is not an accurate measure of your ability to kill things.

 

[Netherek]

Well, with your set up you really begin to favor 1 handers in two weapon fighting over a 2 handed fighting. It's all about things making sense, balance is there under existing rules, it's just 2handers have the obvious format. It takes little imagination to see how to be more effective when using power attack or when facing armoured opponents.

You forget the simple fact you can't have a shield when using a weapon in two hands. That can mean quite a bit in how often you take a hit. With a 2hander you may be the king with a whopping damage that frequently forces an MD save, but that guy with the shield will hit you more often.

And let's look at the historical reasons heavier weapons were designed in the first place. As heavier amours were invented, the ability to injure an opponent became difficult, so they invent weapons that could penetrate the said armour. Ironically, the increase in penetration also increases the momentum and force increasing its damage exponentially.

If it wasn't for gunpowder this trend would probably have continued until the weapons and armor were no longer feasable.

The weapons are represented well, armour is as well. Fighting a against a 2hander is tough if you don't have one as well, I know this from experience. Like it or not, a 2hander rightfully should take you out in far fewer connecting blows than a one hander.

 

[Foxworthy]

The only aspect to two handed weapons I don't like is the x2 Power Attack bonus. I've found that favours things significantly for two handed weapon users.

But now you get more of a use out of power attack and two broadswords. To each thier own.

But each broadsword has to penetrate armour seperately, and each counts seperately towards Massive Damage.

Unlike in D&D, a single attack that does 25 points of damage is significantly better than two attacks that do 15 each. Especially if the single attack pierces the target's armour, and one or both of the double attacks don't.

I've found that the massive damage threshold is incredibly important in Conan. For instance, I believe the tulwar is a more dangerous weapon than the greatsword because the extra crits are more likely to cause massive damage saves.

I prefere a greatsword toa tulwar myself, because it does more damage more often. And a single attack that does 25 isn't as good as an two attacks that do 14 and 11 if you're fighting people with lower hit point totals and more numbers.

I understand that people thign two handers are unbalanced because they do more damage in one hit. But that's because they are bigger weapons. And for realisim two weapons won't do as much damage in one hit as a bigger weapon, in two hits they may.

I'm not sure how I feel about power attack and light weapons. I know that 3.5 nerfed it but I don't know why. I mean you can power attack a fist but not a dagger always seemed weird.

But the way power attack works now is that each hand you use with a one handed or bigger weapon gets a 1x bonus from power attacks. That's balance. It's the bonus that light weapons get that maybe unbalanced.

Two handed weapons are fine, when you want to smash througha rmor you use two weapons, but don't expect to mow down lower level and hit points guy as quickly as the two weapon guy.

 

[Netherek]

The nerf on light weapons is a leverage/force issue really. The line of thought is that you just can't get the power behind a light weapon. For instance a dagger when thrust into an opponent is generally thought of as to the hilt or close to it. So it doesn't matter how much extra force you put behind it, you can't sink it much deeper. Problem is that you still strangely add full Str to the damage.

I think the intent though is to keep a light weapon a finesse weapon.

Maybe going .5 PA bonus on light weapons is the way to go, I just don't think so. I am one of those that prefer it as is.