Benefits of Two-Handed Weapons

[Pumpernickel]

What are the benefits to using two-handed weapons? I understand that they do more damage per hit, but they're slower. I'd call that a wash except one-handed weapons allow a shield to be used at the same time. The range on the two-handed stuff is a little farther, but in my play time that seems to make no difference because enemies with less range quickly and effortlessly close the barely nioticeable gap anyway. For instance: I like spears. But I guess they only reason to use them would be because I like them and not because they actually function as well as single-handed weapons with a shield in the other hand? What do you think?

[Armanz]

You basically summed it up.
i only ever use 2handed weapons if they actually have strong effects.

[Pumpernickel]

Well that's disappointing! I was half hoping you were going to tell me I was missing something...

[wendigo211]

The speed factor doesn't really matter, since initiative doesn't really have any meaning in a real time environment*, you still get the same number of attacks in 6 seconds as a one-handed weapon. They do have larger damage dice, but on average that's only a point of two of damage more. They do tend to have better enchantments than one handed weapons, but it's not a huge effect and it's more noticeable in the BG games than this one.

The best weapon styles are: Two-Weapon Style (an extra attack per round beats every other style), Single-Weapon Style (note that you get the benefits of using a +1 shield, and more critical hits), Two-Handed Weapon Style (only put one point in it) and lastly Sword and Shield (you're just getting an AC bonus vs. missiles). That's not to say that using a shield is necessarily bad, just that it's not worth investing proficiency points in the style, and really it's only worth using one that's +2 or better, otherwise Single-Weapon Style is better.

*=Technically, if you are trying to disrupt a mage it does have an impact, since it affects the delay between telling a character and them making their first attack of the round, but after they make that first attack it doesn't have any effect.

[Wicket W. Warrick]

In my opinion, for a fighter with high strength, the bonus damage is almost unuseful.
Also the bonus attack with two weapons is not so useful. One thing is very useful: to reach an AC so low that your foes can hit you only with a critical. For this, a shield is necessary.

I played with two warriors, one with shield, and the other with two weapons. No way, the one with shield could go straight no matter the enemy. With the other I needed to be careful.

And since fighters have a lot o proficiency point, it could be worth investing point in shield style, since every other weapon style is unuseful for that character. Of course after finishing to max weapon proficiency on weapon that you use.

Also the two weapons are not so useful, since a warrior get a lot of attacks and one more doesn't make the difference. Furthermore one more attack is not one more hit, since your thac0 decrease with both weapons.

[wendigo211]

Originally posted by stef.corsi:

In my opinion, for a fighter with high strength, the bonus damage is almost unuseful.
Also the bonus attack with two weapons is not so useful. One thing is very useful: to reach an AC so low that your foes can hit you only with a critical. For this, a shield is necessary.

You don't need a shield to hit an AC that low, try using some of the buffs your spell casters have. And try playing on Heart of Fury, where shields are useless.

Also the two weapons are not so useful, since a warrior get a lot of attacks and one more doesn't make the difference. Furthermore one more attack is not one more hit, since your thac0 decrease with both weapons.

Wrong, with three points, it's 0 penalty main hand and -2 off hand. It's also an extra two attacks per round once you have a caster with improved haste.

[Pumpernickel]

So ya'll agree that nothing puts two-handed weapons on par with other options? Being able to hit things harder and manipulate weapons faster with two arms instead of one, you'd think they would have tied in some other gameplay mechanics to give the two-handed variety some kind of advantage (or made them do significantly more damage).

@ wendigo211
I haven't played Heart of Fury mode. Shields are useless in it?

[Lyrin]

Originally posted by Pumpernickel:

So ya'll agree that nothing puts two-handed weapons on par with other options? Being able to hit things harder and manipulate weapons faster with two arms instead of one, you'd think they would have tied in some other gameplay mechanics to give the two-handed variety some kind of advantage (or made them do significantly more damage).

@ wendigo211
I haven't played Heart of Fury mode. Shields are useless in it?

Supposedly two-handed weapons are stronger than their one-handed counterparts (once you get into magic item territory). While this is certainly a factor in a game like Baldur's Gate 2 I'm less familiar with the exact item pools in IWD so I can't say with certainty whether this holds true.

Dual-wielding can be amazing depending on the two weapons in question. Anything with a powerful passive effect can be quite strong as an off-hand weapon.

Anyway, two-handed weapons can be very strong in the early game for the range bonus you mentioned. If you have multiple melee attackers and want to get them all into combat while still maintaining a formation (such as having your best AC unit take the bront of attacks) they can be very useful. A sword-and-board character holding the front with a second line of less-armored attackers behind them is a fairly strong idea. Again, that's early-game stuff moreso than a scaleable strategy.

As to your question about spears, you'd probably have to look at the item pool specifically and pore over what the best spears offer in comparison to other items setups, etc. However for clearing normal mode you can make virtually any strategy work. Some may be a little more optimal than others but especially if you're not hardcore savescumming for specific drops then you shouldn't be giving up too much to just do whatever you like.

[wendigo211]

Originally posted by Pumpernickel:

So ya'll agree that nothing puts two-handed weapons on par with other options? Being able to hit things harder and manipulate weapons faster with two arms instead of one, you'd think they would have tied in some other gameplay mechanics to give the two-handed variety some kind of advantage (or made them do significantly more damage).

In third edition you got to add 1.5X your strength damage bonus to two-handed attacks and it doubled the damage bonus from power attack. I still preferred going with a one-handed weapon, since that gave you the option of using a shield or wielding the weapon two-handed, but for classes like a Frenzied Berserker using one of the two-handed only weapons was an option.

@ wendigo211
I haven't played Heart of Fury mode. Shields are useless in it?

Yeah, you more of less get to the point where you're using damage protected mages/druids to draw enemy fire, since anything else is going to last less than a minute, and your other characters are trying to kill whatever is attacking those characters before their defenses fail. So offensive specs work a lot better than defensive ones.

[Wicket W. Warrick]

Originally posted by wendigo211:

You don't need a shield to hit an AC that low, try using some of the buffs your spell casters have. And try playing on Heart of Fury, where shields are useless.

I talk about normal game, HoF it's another game and I agree with you.
Spells can be dispelled, can finish and you need double if you want to cast on two charcacters.
It also depends on how you like to play. I think that having good stats and proficiency without spells or potion helps to enjoy the game. Otherwise it's always cast, battle, sleep, etc.

Originally posted by wendigo211:

Wrong, with three points, it's 0 penalty main hand and -2 off hand. It's also an extra two attacks per round once you have a caster with improved haste.

I know, but I meant that In the beginning you don't have 3 points on style, later using points on styles would mean not using them on weapon. At high level it's like you say but you already have high number of attacks, high damage, etc.. It doesn't mame the diference in my opinion, while lower AC does.

It's not easy to give advice for everyone. Everything depends on how you play and how you built your part.
I would give my main warrior a shiled and two weapon to a second character, but so I have a character that I don''t have to worry about, just go in the front and kill. The other has to be managed, with spell, movements, strategy, ecc..