Well, considering that you can do twice as much damage and you get the special powers of each weapon while all you lose is a few minor points of AC and a few immunities i'd say yes. But since i'm interested in your opinions as well, bring it on!

Sword and shield only gives you some AC against Missile Weapon - pretty useless, i think. I prefer fighting singlehanded (because of the critical hit with both 19 and 20) also you can use a bow.

i my char isn't capable of wielding a good bow i usually stick to using two weapons - having an additional Attack per round does the trick quite often...

The only people I ever have use a sword and shield are my clerics or druids. My paladins must wield a huge two-handed sword. It just seems right. My thieves go with single weapon, so I can have my bow available at all times. Fighters and rangers both dual wield. At the higher levels when your throwing out 5/2 and 7/2 attacks per round, they add up pretty quick.

I think the benefits of the extra attacks, compensates for the lower armor class gained by wielding a shield.

Do not underestimate shields, my solo Cavalier used various number of shields, having another -5 to your AC is not a bad thing and Whirlwinding mutes the point of having extra attacks with Dualwielding.

Shield of Reflection( kisses it), Shield of Balduran, Darksteel Shield, etc... ...

Yep, if you are big on whirlwind, shields are logical. If you like smite and critical hit more, then use 2 weapons... Seems pretty logical. I had keldorn running around with Purifier and Foebane. He was tough!

Shield of reflection is a true gem. ;) Darksteel is nice, but Shield of the Order seems better to me. Saving Throw bonuses are nice. ;)

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by toriuxik:
Yep, if you are big on whirlwind, shields are logical. If you like smite and critical hit more, then use 2 weapons... Seems pretty logical. I had keldorn running around with Purifier and Foebane. He was tough!
Shield of reflection is a true gem. ;) Darksteel is nice, but Shield of the Order seems better to me. Saving Throw bonuses are nice. ;) <hr></blockquote>

I was a Cavalier, so I already had low, low saving throws. I was more interested in boosting my resistances, but yes, Shield of the Order is good too.

I would have to say both have their place, but one thing to think about is that when you use Whirlwind you have your attacks set to 10 a round, so a sword and shield user would be doing 10 attacks with one weapon, as opposed to 10 between 2 weapons. So thats more assurance that the effect of your one weapon will happen, as opposed to the effects of the two... Which in my book is a good thing, as more control = more power! ;)

lol, and I guess you would have very nice resistance with that shield and a cav, wouldn't you? ;) Toss in blue armour, and certain other equipment, and you safe from the elements at least. It actually IS handy of some fights.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>
Originally posted by lord_gabriel:

Sword and shield only gives you some AC against Missile Weapon - pretty useless, i think. I prefer fighting singlehanded (because of the critical hit with both 19 and 20) also you can use a bow.
<hr></blockquote>

Lord gabriel, I think you misunderstood the question. It wasn't strictly about comparing the weapon skill "dual wield" vs. "sword and shield. The question was more "which do you prefer... a dual wielding for the extra damage or carrying a shield for the extra defense".

I will freely admit that I'm a big believer in carrying a shield. I LOVE the extra AC.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Dundee Slaytern:
Do not underestimate shields, my solo Cavalier used various number of shields, having another -5 to your AC is not a bad thing and Whirlwinding mutes the point of having extra attacks with Dualwielding.
<hr></blockquote>Yes, but its not only about the number of attacks a weapon gives you. Their is for instance not a single shield that grants you negative plain protection while there are plenty of weapons that can do that.