Difference between revisions of "Talk:Two-Weapon Fighter (3.5e Alternate Class Feature)"
From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
m |
m |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
: Two-Weapon Fighting is slightly more useful than Armor Prof, also the ignoring prerequisite simply echoes what the ranger does. It one less feat to take if you want to make a fighter that use light armor and two weapons. --[[User:Leziad|Leziad]] ([[User talk:Leziad|talk]]) 10:29, 10 November 2015 (UTC) | : Two-Weapon Fighting is slightly more useful than Armor Prof, also the ignoring prerequisite simply echoes what the ranger does. It one less feat to take if you want to make a fighter that use light armor and two weapons. --[[User:Leziad|Leziad]] ([[User talk:Leziad|talk]]) 10:29, 10 November 2015 (UTC) | ||
| − | :: Perhaps, but as far as ACFs go this does extremely little. If it would do a little more, it would be better. Perhaps, give access to the full Two-Weapon Fighting tree over time. But as it stands, it takes away one of a fighter's very few strengths - the easy access to high AC it needs to be a damage sponge - and receives in return something it could just as easily gain by expending one of its ten bonus feats. --[[User:Sulacu|Sulacu]] ([[User talk:Sulacu|talk]]) 11:16, 10 November 2015 (UTC) | + | :: Perhaps, but as far as ACFs go this does extremely little. If it would do a little more, it would be better. Perhaps, give access to the full Two-Weapon Fighting tree over time. But as it stands, it takes away one of a fighter's very few strengths - the easy access to the high AC it needs to be a damage sponge - and receives in return something it could just as easily gain by expending one of its ten bonus feats. The benefits are not commensurate with what you lose, in my opinion. --[[User:Sulacu|Sulacu]] ([[User talk:Sulacu|talk]]) 11:16, 10 November 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 11:17, 10 November 2015
Ratings
|
Sulacu is neutral on this article and rated it 2 of 4. |
|---|---|
| While two-weapon fighting is undoubtably useful, this is effectively trading two feats (Armor Proficiency (medium) and Armor Proficiency (heavy)) for one (Two-Weapon Fighting). Furthermore, I don't really see ignoring Dexterity requirements as very useful considering that, having relinquished the defenses of both heavy armors and shields you would have a high Dexterity bonus to offset the drop in defense in the first place. Basically, I don't think this is any more effective than taking Two-Weapon Fighting as one of your fighter bonus feats. |
- Two-Weapon Fighting is slightly more useful than Armor Prof, also the ignoring prerequisite simply echoes what the ranger does. It one less feat to take if you want to make a fighter that use light armor and two weapons. --Leziad (talk) 10:29, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
- Perhaps, but as far as ACFs go this does extremely little. If it would do a little more, it would be better. Perhaps, give access to the full Two-Weapon Fighting tree over time. But as it stands, it takes away one of a fighter's very few strengths - the easy access to the high AC it needs to be a damage sponge - and receives in return something it could just as easily gain by expending one of its ten bonus feats. The benefits are not commensurate with what you lose, in my opinion. --Sulacu (talk) 11:16, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
