Dual wield - useless?

[Dilbert]

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?

[Jaramira]

No idea.

[Jaramira]

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]

[Magness]

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.

[Jaramira]

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

[J'aran]

Originally posted by Dilbert: 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 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 ]

[Wolven]

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)

[pritchke]

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]

[J'aran]

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.

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.

[pritchke]

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