Don't two-handed weapons handicap players by taking two slots?

[Legacy_MagicalMaster]

               

If we look at epic weapon specialization with the +5 enhancement we are then looking at a strength score of 44 for the two-handed to win on average.  Easy for an RDD, but otherwise the double weapons will often win damage-wise as long as they are heavily supplemented with feats.

 

Let's break this down and look at a standard fighter/wm that has 34 base strength with another +12 from gear for 18 modifier total.  Let's assume the fighter will hit 75% of the time on his highest attack with a 2H and we'll compare greatsword to double sword.

 

Let's assume +7 weapons with 2d8 bonus damage to start.

 

2H = 7 (base) + 9 (bonus damage) + 7 (enhancement) + 6 (EWS) + 27 (strength) = 56 damage per hit.

 

Hits per round is 75%/50%/25%/5%/75% = 2.3.  2.3 * 56 = 128.8 damage per round.

 

DW: 4.5 (base) + 9 (bonus damage) + 7 (enhancement) + 6 (EWS) + 18 (strength) = 44.5 damage per hit.

 

Hits per round is 65%/40%/15%/5%/75 = 2.0.  2.0 * 44.5 = 89 damage per round for main hand.

 

Offhand is the same except for 9 less strength damage per hit, so 35.5 damage per hit.  HPR is 65%/40% = 1.05.  35.5 * 1.05 = 37.3.

 

37.3 + 89 = 126.3.

 

So they're about even with that set-up (dual-wield slightly less) -- except that dual-wield requires 3 extra feats and does less damage per hit.

 

...and a 1H/shield has 102.3 damage per round output  So in this case the 2H (or dual-wield) has about 25% more damage best case and loses all the shield AC.

 

In my playing experience, the survivability benefits of a shield pretty much exceed any benefits provided by 2H or double weapon.

 

In my own module, I did a few basic things to make 2H and double weapons more playable. 2H get enough damage bonus to give them double their STR modifier.  Equiping a double-weapon or quarterstaff gives +2 shield AC and can be improved by +1 for every 10 parry skill points.  I also reserve the best weapon enchantments for larger weapons.  I won't argue that this is balanced, but it's made these options more viable and fun for me.

 

I'd certainly argue it's more balanced, at a minimum.  By default there's basically no real reason to not use a shield, gain so much defense and lose little offense.

 

One of them is exactly what you were sceptical about: no damage immunities granted by items (they are OP to begin with due to possibility of stacking, then we have what you said about their value being ridiculously low for how powerful they are).

 

Er, I was saying the reverse, that getting like 10-15 damage resistance to a damage type barely takes up anything on the item budget.  10% slashing immunity makes an item require level 6...while 10 slashing resist only requires 5 and 15 slashing resist only requires 7.  Once you get to higher values it's more reasonable (slashing resist 25 and 75% slashing immunity are about the same value) -- but except for critical hits the resistance is still much better at appropriate levels (would need to deal 34 average slashing damage per hit to make the immunity superior).

 

I, on the other hand, am under impression that ILR is quite a nice guideline after considering some anomalies like the above one. Well, at least on lower levels, because on higher ones the evaluation of items does get crazy.

 

Not really.

 

Take regen, for example.  Unless you're going for a module with barely any healing then it's insanely overpriced in terms of budget.  Regen +3 is a level 13 item...and it's equivalent to drinking a Cure Serious Wounds potion every 30 seconds.  Cure Serious Wounds is valued at 66g while an item with Regen +3 is valued at about 33,600g.  Usually going to be better to have 509 Cure Serious Wounds potions over an item with that regen -- among other things can burst heal when needed.  And it looks even worse if we bring in full Heal potions.

 

Or the damage resistance as mentioned above, insanely cheap to sneak on 5/10/15 damage resistance which has a major impact.

 

Or how enhancement is cheaper than AB/damage.  Weapon +4 is about 30k.  Weapon with 4 AB and 4 bonus damage is 41k.

 

Or how having two items with 2 regen/2 saving throws is superior to one item with 4 regen and one item with 4 regen (by about 10% item budget).

 

So, yes, in epic levels it gets completely ridiculous but it still has major issues at low levels as well.

 

Edit: In case it interests you (all characters were humans, so no size modifier applied), 1H/S character had 44AC, 2H and 1H/1H had 35AC alike. Don't remember AB though, and can't check it at the moment, so this info alone is pretty much useless right now.

 

You've mentioned +5 weapons, so let's assume, say, only +6 strength from gear to be generous.  Level 40 typical fighter has mundane AB of 46, so 54 in this case.  Your AB is 10+ more than AC, which is kind of a problematic situation.  In such an environment a shield doesn't do very much because you're basically going to hit most of the time anyway.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Grani]

               

 

Er, I was saying the reverse, that getting like 10-15 damage resistance to a damage type barely takes up anything on the item budget.  10% slashing immunity makes an item require level 6...while 10 slashing resist only requires 5 and 15 slashing resist only requires 7.  Once you get to higher values it's more reasonable (slashing resist 25 and 75% slashing immunity are about the same value) -- but except for critical hits the resistance is still much better at appropriate levels (would need to deal 34 average slashing dam

 

 

Not really.

 

Take regen, for example.  Unless you're going for a module with barely any healing then it's insanely overpriced in terms of budget.  Regen +3 is a level 13 item...and it's equivalent to drinking a Cure Serious Wounds potion every 30 seconds.  Cure Serious Wounds is valued at 66g while an item with Regen +3 is valued at about 33,600g.  Usually going to be better to have 509 Cure Serious Wounds potions over an item with that regen -- among other things can burst heal when needed.  And it looks even worse if we bring in full Heal potions.

 

Oh, my bad, in this case.

Still, I don't think it's appropriate to compare two properties on a single item (immunity and resistance) and evaluate them solely on the principle of how effective each one is at a given ILR.

75% immunity is so cheap that it can be used as a (well, we're still going with ILR stuff, right?) property on lvl16 item. Similarly, two immunities 25% each will make the item lvl16 as well. This means one can have two full immunities by having just three items, due to this blasted stacking.

 

Now the resistances. At this item level maximum resistance against, for example, any of the physical damage types can be up to 25. This is some powerful resist, but at level 40 it by no means will allow players to absorb all of damage (unless we're talking about, for example, bludgeoning damage coming as a side-effect of an Ice Storm and not one dealt with a melee character's weapon, but that's rather irrelevant at this point). And what makes it less broken than immunities is that it does not stack.

 

Obviously, such resistances CAN be overpowered on lower levels than 40, but it's still not nearly as bad as with immunities. Up to ILR 16 and with my guidelines in mind, immunities would be OP on any character level, while resistances might only be considered so at lower ones.

 

And I think this applies to what you said about regeneration being overpriced, too. I think that the fact it stacks is worth this overpricing (in other words, here ILR makes things right, while in case of immunities, quite the opposite). If the price was lower, everyone could have something like Regeneration (5) as a side property in every of their items and it wouldn't change the value of an item much. And that would be almost free regeneration of about 60HP per round, which is almost 10% of HP pool of a bulky lvl40 character.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_WhiZard]

               

Let's break this down and look at a standard fighter/wm that has 34 base strength with another +12 from gear for 18 modifier total.  Let's assume the fighter will hit 75% of the time on his highest attack with a 2H and we'll compare greatsword to double sword.

 

 

You didn't break anything down, you added in haste which was not part of what I maintained.  Perhaps the RDD would have haste naturally, but a WM would need a higher magic world (likely with damage bonuses on weapons) for haste to be factored in.   Also, you only looked at a progression that is near peak for the two-handed vs. double-weapon.  You didn't do an average over a larger range, so your conclusion on which one did the better damage is limited to an AC range much smaller than would normally be encountered.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Empyre65]

               

This might help you make comparisons: http://www.afterlife....org/Thott/nwn/

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_WhiZard]

               

This might help you make comparisons: http://www.afterlife....org/Thott/nwn/

 

 

Supports my claim exactly.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MagicalMaster]

               

Supports my claim exactly.

 

No, actually, it refutes your claim (though it technically only adds 4 damage for EWS rather than 6, even with both feats checked, which is an error).

 

Here's a non-hasted comparison (can ignore stuff that is static across both comparisons so don't panic at incorrect crit/AB stuff -- crit affects both equally and AB is relatively the same).

 

What do we see?

 

Starting at 39 AC, the 2H and dual-wielding are virtually the same...which is a whole 1 AC higher than the 2H's AB.  So unless you're walking around with AB higher than enemy AC, the 2H offers the same damage for three less feats.

 

And if we throw in Haste we get this.  Now 2H and DW are equal at 34 AC and 2H is a tiny bit ahead after 37 AC.

 

That's using +7 weapons with 2d8 bonus damage, "standard" rules.  If we switch to +5 weapons with no damage bonuses (which is a level 15 weapon per Grani's tests) we get this for non-hasted which has 2H slightly better across the board and this for hasted which has 2H about 10% better across the board.

 

And again, this DW stuff is disregarding the 3 feat investment and the necessary 15 dexterity, which means you're dropping points in Constitution or Intelligence compared to the 2H (or potentially Strength).

 

You didn't break anything down, you added in haste which was not part of what I maintained.  Perhaps the RDD would have haste naturally, but a WM would need a higher magic world (likely with damage bonuses on weapons) for haste to be factored in.   Also, you only looked at a progression that is near peak for the two-handed vs. double-weapon.  You didn't do an average over a larger range, so your conclusion on which one did the better damage is limited to an AC range much smaller than would normally be encountered.

 

There's not even Haste potions?  I mean, permahaste is common even on medium magic worlds, you hardly need something super high magic.

 

I'm not sure what the last half of that means.  What peak are you referring to?  And I looked at an AB where DW *should* have an advantage due to AC being semi low.

 

Obviously, such resistances CAN be overpowered on lower levels than 40, but it's still not nearly as bad as with immunities. Up to ILR 16 and with my guidelines in mind, immunities would be OP on any character level, while resistances might only be considered so at lower ones.

 

Think about what you're saying here.  "The default ILR system is pretty good because even though a level 16 using legal level 16 items is broken, a level 40 using level 16 items is fine."  That's like the opposite of a non-broken system.

 

And I think this applies to what you said about regeneration being overpriced, too. I think that the fact it stacks is worth this overpricing (in other words, here ILR makes things right, while in case of immunities, quite the opposite). If the price was lower, everyone could have something like Regeneration (5) as a side property in every of their items and it wouldn't change the value of an item much. And that would be almost free regeneration of about 60HP per round, which is almost 10% of HP pool of a bulky lvl40 character.

 

Regen +5 counts as a level 19 item all by itself -- cutting the cost down to half or one third would not suddenly make it spammable on everything.  On top of that, worlds with +5 regen items usually have unlimited access to full Heal potions.  And it takes an awful lot of Heal potions to reach the same cost as +5 regen on everything (73 Heal potions per item with +5 regen).  Could also get better properties on those items.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Grani]

               

Think about what you're saying here.  "The default ILR system is pretty good because even though a level 16 using legal level 16 items is broken, a level 40 using level 16 items is fine."  That's like the opposite of a non-broken system.

 

You're right. I already said before that this evaluation is pretty dumb at times. My previous post was rather trying to explain how resistances in ILR are much less broken than immunities, not that they are without flaws.

 

 

Regen +5 counts as a level 19 item all by itself -- cutting the cost down to half or one third would not suddenly make it spammable on everything.  On top of that, worlds with +5 regen items usually have unlimited access to full Heal potions.  And it takes an awful lot of Heal potions to reach the same cost as +5 regen on everything (73 Heal potions per item with +5 regen).  Could also get better properties on those items.

 

I see your point. You might be right, perhaps they are overpriced somewhat.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_WhiZard]

               

No, actually, it refutes your claim (though it technically only adds 4 damage for EWS rather than 6, even with both feats checked, which is an error).

 

Here's a non-hasted comparison (can ignore stuff that is static across both comparisons so don't panic at incorrect crit/AB stuff -- crit affects both equally and AB is relatively the same).

 

What do we see?

 

Starting at 39 AC, the 2H and dual-wielding are virtually the same...which is a whole 1 AC higher than the 2H's AB.  So unless you're walking around with AB higher than enemy AC, the 2H offers the same damage for three less feats.

 

 

Correct, I simply put the enhancement at +11 and didn't check weapon specialization for that reason.  Not sure why you are insisting on 46 strength, as a mundane +5 weapon with no bonuses is about level 40 gear for a low magic world (in other words no +12 strength, see 3.0 treasure guidelines).  My point was that at 44 strength the 2-handed became superior.  Not seeing anything in your calculations to even remotely look into that claim.

 

 

 

 

There's not even Haste potions?  I mean, permahaste is common even on medium magic worlds, you hardly need something super high magic.

 

 

Not reliable enough by 3.0 treasure scale.  My calculations refuted the notion that one needs a high magic world for the double weapon to be superior.  In fact it can be shown reasonably well in a low magic world.

 

 

I'm not sure what the last half of that means.  What peak are you referring to?  And I looked at an AB where DW *should* have an advantage due to AC being semi low.

 

 

No the double weapons have the best advantage both in the case when all blows can hit on a 2 and in the case when all blow need a 20 to hit. Going around +3-+5 to hit (for the first blow) is around the sweet spot for the 2-handed weapons in comparison.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MagicalMaster]

               

My point was that at 44 strength the 2-handed became superior.  Not seeing anything in your calculations to even remotely look into that claim.

Here you go.  42 strength, 2H becomes better at 36 AC or higher (which is equal to the AB of dual-wielding and 2 less than 2H) and is within 3% of DW even in the absolute worst case.  And that's without needing to sink 3 feats into it (techncially four if we're considering a double weapon) and you don't need to invest extra points in Dexterity to get to 15 base for Ambidexterity.

Not sure why you are insisting on 46 strength, as a mundane +5 weapon with no bonuses is about level 40 gear for a low magic world (in other words no +12 strength, see 3.0 treasure guidelines).

You have chest, helm, cloak, gloves, belt, ring1, ring2, amulet, and boots as non weapon slots.  You can't come up with +12 Strength between 9 different item slots?  I find that extremely unlikely.

Not reliable enough by 3.0 treasure scale.

Uh, a vendor?  What server/module have you played that don't have Haste potions available from a vendor at level 40?

My calculations refuted the notion that one needs a high magic world for the double weapon to be superior.  In fact it can be shown reasonably well in a low magic world.

Even if you have 0 strength from gear/potions/spells, 2H is still equal or better at 33 or higher AC (with 32 AB for 2H and 30 AB for DW, so a whole 1 higher than 2H AB).  And again, this is without any extra feat cost or stat cost.

No the double weapons have the best advantage both in the case when all blows can hit on a 2 and in the case when all blow need a 20 to hit. Going around +3-+5 to hit (for the first blow) is around the sweet spot for the 2-handed weapons in comparison.

If all blows can hit on 2 or all blows need a 20 to hit then something is seriously screwed up.  And no, +3-5 to hit on the first blow is not the sweet spot -- look at any of these graphs.  On the one above, for example, it's around +10-15 to hit that 2H has the largest advantage over DW.

You're right. I already said before that this evaluation is pretty dumb at times. My previous post was rather trying to explain how resistances in ILR are much less broken than immunities, not that they are without flaws.

I'm not so sure about that.  You could legally make a character that has 50 resistance to all, Immunity to level 9 and below spells, Improved Evasion, and immunity to crits which is therefore basically immune to all damage.  Might be able to scratch it slightly with Greater Ruin.  Even a 2H user with max strength is only doing 7 + 6 + 27 = 40 physical damage per hit on average without weapon bonuses -- so unless you have a +11 or better weapon you'll do 0 damage on an average swing.  Might be able to scratch enemies slightly but functionally immune.  Obviously if you then make a dragon that does 200 physical damage per hit then the immunity is better and all, but...ILR is still incredibly broken in general.


I'm not sure the total item cost would even be higher than getting 100% immunity to all damage, will try to check later.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Grani]

               

I'm not so sure about that. You could legally make a character that has 50 resistance to all, Immunity to level 9 and below spells, Improved Evasion, and immunity to crits which is therefore basically immune to all damage. Might be able to scratch it slightly with Greater Ruin. Even a 2H user with max strength is only doing 7 + 6 + 27 = 40 physical damage per hit on average without weapon bonuses -- so unless you have a +11 or better weapon you'll do 0 damage on an average swing. Might be able to scratch enemies slightly but functionally immune. Obviously if you then make a dragon that does 200 physical damage per hit then the immunity is better and all, but...ILR is still incredibly broken in general.


I'm not sure the total item cost would even be higher than getting 100% immunity to all damage, will try to check later.

 

But I'm only considering ILR for lower levels, up to level 16, as I said.

Immunity to crits makes an item level 20 by itself, so it doesn't apply.

50 resists are not available in such an environment as well, with the cap for physical damage resistance being 25 and others about 40, with a few exceptions.

Maximum spell immunity is immunity to spells of level 3 or lower, so I don't know where you got this level 9 from, either.


If you're saying about unchecked IRL being unusable due to being possible to create such items, and it looks like you are, then, of course, it's true. But all this time I'm only considering IRL tweaked and restricted in several ways, like only up to level 16, aiming for balance at level 40 mainly and having such properties like immunities and resistances in check.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_WhiZard]

               

Here you go. 42 strength, 2H becomes better at 36 AC or higher (which is equal to the AB of dual-wielding and 2 less than 2H) and is within 3% of DW even in the absolute worst case. And that's without needing to sink 3 feats into it (techncially four if we're considering a double weapon) and you don't need to invest extra points in Dexterity to get to 15 base for Ambidexterity.




 

 

I have already generated my own previously (including the 19-20/x2 crit range) and have already made the statement that it exactly backs my claim.  Why I am making this bold assertion, is based on balance of AB and AC.  The typical model followed is that the tough monsters are hit by a pure fighter (with maximum AB/ strength investment and scaled by gear) on a 15.  This number is not arbitrary, it reflects both the +5 step difference from one blow to the next, as well as being the maximum critical range for the 19-20/x2 weapons.  That is a pure fighter will not gain any critical advantage for having a scimitar as opposed to a longsword, unless he multi-classes to gain the additional AB benefit.  A weapon master gets +7 above the fighter and so we are looking at the dual-wielder needing a 10 to hit with a double weapon (or an 8 to hit with a two-handed weapon) for a tough monster.  This exactly matches the 10-20/x3 critical range of having two kukris.  So, further investment in weapon master is used to supplement the critical hit benefits already provided in the first 7 levels.

 

 

You have chest, helm, cloak, gloves, belt, ring1, ring2, amulet, and boots as non weapon slots. You can't come up with +12 Strength between 9 different item slots? I find that extremely unlikely.


Uh, a vendor? What server/module have you played that don't have Haste potions available from a vendor at level 40?

 

I have played many servers without any potions for sale or to be brewed.  One of my favorite servers started you off with having to craft weapons with damage penalties (no normal ingredients for standard crafting).

 

But because you keep on insisting on adding on a haste source, I might as well point out why this will make no difference even in a medium magic environment.  The spell scroll "flame weapon" gives 12.5 fire damage on-hit (not multiplied by criticals) which provides most of the boost needed to bring the +5 weapon from being equal in double vs. 2-hand without haste to being equal with haste.  And flame weapon costs less and can be used with a single level in cleric, wizard, sorcerer, bard (with minimal UMD), or rogue/assassin (with high UMD).  More levels can dilute the weapon master AB benefit, but can provide greater benefit for a short duration (for example cleric 3 gets bless, aid, bull's strength each lasting at least 3 turns, and additionally has two more level one spells).

 

 

Even if you have 0 strength from gear/potions/spells, 2H is still equal or better at 33 or higher AC (with 32 AB for 2H and 30 AB for DW, so a whole 1 higher than 2H AB). And again, this is without any extra feat cost or stat cost.


If all blows can hit on 2 or all blows need a 20 to hit then something is seriously screwed up. And no, +3-5 to hit on the first blow is not the sweet spot -- look at any of these graphs. On the one above, for example, it's around +10-15 to hit that 2H has the largest advantage over DW.

 

See reasoning above.  The weapon master is really made so that his epic AB allows him a large amount of freedom with the critical hit modification in the first seven levels, and weapon master costs a huge feat investment just to give this opportunity.

 

As for the +3-+5 range that was made for a specific progression you used (and then later removed haste for another comparison).  If you looked at that progression with haste you would see the two hand have a small region of going over the double weapon (where without haste it would not, though I would suggest you also add in the missing +2 for the epic weapon specialization shortcoming).

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

MM I think that Whizard has lost in the arguments and trying to apply DnD 3.0 rules/recommendations. In DnD, various ability bonuses on items doesn't stack, neither they stack with spells (unless different kind of bonus which for ability bonuses isn't common). So In DnD you really wouldn't hit +12 str bonus.

 

But that seems to me completely unapplicable to NWN which does not follow these rules and where potions of Haste is very common loot. I would also said that haste boots/other item is pretty common item in low magic environment as well (haste boots = 11ILR, and those other unique boots with haste are 17, robe of dark moon is 9) though many servers out there are HCRP where they do not allow this - but I think that speaking generally haste is common unlike current PWs. I think better example of this environment would be NWN OC than HCRP persistant worlds.

 

And Whizard is on purpose ignoring the 15dex and 3 feats investment which would make a doubleweapon character had less strenght thus lower AB (I think we should compare them this way rather than assuming that player take same str and lower his constition/intelligence). Yes in always-hit and spam-1 scenarion, when comparing weapons then the one with more attacks per round will win, but these two situations are not common and will happen rarely. So the argument that double weapons/dual wielding are better because they have advantage in these two rare situations is off imo. Speaking generally of course. For building for specific module, it would be a different conversation...

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_WhiZard]

               

And Whizard is on purpose ignoring the 15dex and 3 feats investment which would make a doubleweapon character had less strenght thus lower AB (I think we should compare them this way rather than assuming that player take same str and lower his constition/intelligence). Yes in always-hit and spam-1 scenarion, when comparing weapons then the one with more attacks per round will win, but these two situations are not common and will happen rarely. So the argument that double weapons/dual wielding are better because they have advantage in these two rare situations is off imo. Speaking generally of course. For building for specific module, it would be a different conversation...

 

18 strength + 15 dex still leaves me with 6 stat points to spend on 14 constitution.  I could do that or lower the strength by 2 and take another class with AB boosts (like cleric) invest 4 points in that class ability, and 2 points in intelligence.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

18 strength + 15 dex still leaves me with 6 stat points to spend on 14 constitution.  I could do that or lower the strength by 2 and take another class with AB boosts (like cleric) invest 4 points in that class ability, and 2 points in intelligence.

No you cant take another class. If you compare something you have to compare on same character.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_WhiZard]

               

No you cant take another class. If you compare something you have to compare on same character.

 

 

I mentioned the cleric possibility above with its comparison.  Please read.