Is dual wield a good option for high lvl chars? My lvl 20 Ranger has 5 Basic attacks. With 2 Weapons he has 4+1 Attacks. Does this mean he attacks 4 times with the first and one time with the second hand? If that's so dual wield pretty sucks cause you hit more worse and the secondary weapon is of course a bit weaker.
And my Ranger seems to have more attacks than my other characters not based on itmes, normal?

No idea.

Any how, a weapon does more damage than a shield ever did, and anyway, a character with high dex can dodge most attacks. [img]smile.gif[/img]

From a purely potential damage perspective, dual wielding is better for lower strength characters and 2 handed weapons are better for high STR characters.

2 Handed weapons are better for high STR characters since 2 handed weapons get 1.5 times the character's STR bonus. For example, a character with a STR of 18 would get a 2 handed STR bonus of +4 x 1.5 == +6. However, a STR 10 character would get no STR bonus (0 x 1.5 is still zero). If the low STR character does not already have 5 attacks, dual wielding will give you that extra attack for potentially more damage.


As far as high LEVEL characters ... well, I suppose that if you already have 5 attacks with a single weapon, there's no point to carrying a second weapon since you'll get no more attacks. However, some weapons have special abilities (like extra STR, or an AC bonus, etc.) that may make it worth dual wielding.

I prefer all of my characters to have Dual Wielding feats, high Dex, 12-16 Strength, Dodge and Deflect Arrows and weapon finesse.

No character can get 5 attacks/round without any modifiers, despite what the manual says. Four is the max, and the only way to get 5 is by dual-wielding, using a weapon that gives +1 attack, using the Rapid Shot-feat with a missile weapon or being under the effect of a spell that gives you additional attacks. If your Ranger has 5 attacks per round without any of those things in effect, you somehow got a lucky bug. In that case, yes, dual-wielding would be useless. Otherwise, no.

And yes, 4+1 attacks/round means 4 attacks with the main weapon and 1 with the off-hand weapon. You can never get more than one attack per round with your off-hand.

[ 04-21-2003, 12:22 PM: Message edited by: J'aran ]

Does the weapon in your offhand have to be smaller than the one in your normal hand so as to have no further penalty (besides de -2 with ambidex and dual wield)? I mean like in Neverwinter Nights or you can dualwield any 2 weapons with the -2 (I ask because I want my dwarf to dualwield battle axes .. yes, I know, not very original)

I have never heard of a size penalty when it comes to dual wielding. Basically you get to decided what weapons to use in each hand.

Size doesn't matter. [img]graemlins/laughsaywhat.gif[/img]

Yes it does. And I should know, because I'm a Half-Orc. And everyone knows that Half-Orcs are big. In every department. [img]tongue.gif[/img] But let's stick to the game, there are other places to discuss this kind of thing. :D

If your off-hand weapon isn't a shortsword or dagger, you do get additional penalties. -4 to hit for each hand instead of -2, if I'm not mistaken.

But with ambidexterity you should be able to use a large weapon in either hand, that is the idea of ambidexterity.

pritchke, you CAN use a large weapon in the off hand with ambidex and 2 weapon fighting. However, the BAB penalty is -4 if the offhand weapon isn't a "small blade" (i.e. short sword or dagger). If the offhand weapon is a small blade, then the penalty is reduced to -2.

Does that mean my character cannot be left handed?

all your character are naturally right handed.

Is there anything called lefthanded-iscm? I never knew that having a large blade had a penalty...so that's why my people kept missing....

So in the end...you really would want most of your people to be dual wielders unless they have low constitution or not specialising in fighting....right?

It really depends because you do have to waste feat points in ambidexterity and dual wield and these points can sometimes be better spent elsewhere. Rangers, I believe can get away with this by wearing leather armour.

I found a site that listed an ideal party and were to allocate points and ambidexterity and dual wield were seldom used. One of the tings they did was start with a level 1 ranger, then switched to a druid to allow the druid to dual wield without wasting necessary points.

I think there rule of thumb was dual wield so you don't have to waste the points to dual wield, or you have a few points in feats that you know you can spare.

Describes a powergaming party byt tips are good for building any party.
http://db.gamefaqs.com/computer/dosw...ale_ii_upp.txt

I am sure other people may think differently.

[ 04-22-2003, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

It's not uncommon for a rogue to take a level of ranger to get "free" dual wielding. This strategy works well for rogues since most rogues will limit themselves to leather or studded leather armor and the ranger virtual dual wielding works only with light or no armor.

The Ranger/Rogue multiclass is one of the best MC combos in IWD2. A ranger-rogue gets virtual dual wielding without having to seriously sacrifice the stealthy skills. And it doesn't hurt to spend a few skill points on Wildnerness Lore for ... you know where. ;)

Ranger/Rogue mixes can work from Ranger 1/Rogue X (just to get the dual wielding) to a 50/50 mix all the ray to ranger X/Rogue 6 or so. 50/50 Ranger rogues are nicely balanced characters, good skills with slightly improved fighting abilities and HP.

Monks get 5 attacks/round starting at 18th level [img]smile.gif[/img]

If doing the Rogue/Ranger combo is it better to start as a rogue or ranger? or does it matter?

If doing the Rogue/Ranger combo is it better to start as a rogue or ranger? or does it matter? </font>[/QUOTE]IMHO, whenever you intend to multiclass a character, it's better to start with the class that is more skill dependant and get's more skill points/level. This means, any time that you're gonna play a Rogue X/anything else, start as a rogue. Rogues get 4 SP/level, plus any more INT bonus SP, plus the human 1 SP/level bonus.

Always start as a rogue.

Monks get 5 attacks/round starting at 18th level [img]smile.gif[/img] </font>[/QUOTE]No, I'm afraid they don't. I know it says that in the manual, but I've soloed a Monk once, and at level 20 he still had a base number of 4 attacks/round.

Rogue b/c of the 4x multiplier on skills at character creation.

That assumes the manual is correct in the way it assigns starting skill points and I don't think it is. The rogue still gets more starting points than the ranger though, just not in the amount the manual states I believe. [img]smile.gif[/img]