Forgotten Kingdoms Forums

I have noticed for rogues at least (not sure if this is true of all classes) that I am apparently able to take feats involving the dual wield skill (well they appear on my feat list), yet do not have the option of training he dual wield skill

I am thinking that perhaps these feats should not be present on a player feat list unless they are able to utilize the skill (like how you need magic to even see metamagic feat in your feat list). That or give any classes that have access to these feats the option to take that skill

The first option would probably be the most logical, but also a little ineffective. Having those feats on the list really hurts nobody, on the contrary it lets info about two-weapon fighting trainers to be more easily available and circulated. And given how sparse these trainers are I see no harm in this.

The second option, to give dual wield to everybody, seems not too reasonable just because the feats are visible, since skills have been assigned with a reason to the various classes. Sure, some stuff might be changed or given away, like, say, the age-old proposals to give grip to paladins and second attack to wizards, but I don't think this is really needed for dual wield, since those who usually dual wield, already get the skill, while those who don't get it would likely not dual wield anyway in 99.9% of the cases.

Concerning rogues, it is only guilded thieves who get dual wield, since that is essential to their combat style. Bards get instead shield proficiency and shieldwork, which are more useful to them than dual wield. Unguilded rogues, needless to say, get neither, since they will get either one or the other once they pick their guild.

Vaemar wrote:The first option would probably be the most logical, but also a little ineffective. Having those feats on the list really hurts nobody, on the contrary it lets info about two-weapon fighting trainers to be more easily available and circulated. And given how sparse these trainers are I see no harm in this.

The second option, to give dual wield to everybody, seems not too reasonable just because the feats are visible, since skills have been assigned with a reason to the various classes. Sure, some stuff might be changed or given away, like, say, the age-old proposals to give grip to paladins and second attack to wizards, but I don't think this is really needed for dual wield, since those who usually dual wield, already get the skill, while those who don't get it would likely not dual wield anyway in 99.9% of the cases.

I'd be curious as to whether these choices for skill assignments are actually showing an affect. Does having access to dual wield actually seem to draw players to those classes, are players in those classes actually using dual wield combat styles as opposed to sword and board/two-handed?

If not, in general I don't see why a Priest or a Wizard or whatever who wants to dual wield for flavor/rp reasons shouldn't be able to, they either won't be able to use it to its full effect or will have to invest stat and feat points that from an optimization perspective would probably have been better invested elsewhere anyway.

Jadren wrote:I'd be curious as to whether these choices for skill assignments are actually showing an affect. Does having access to dual wield actually seem to draw players to those classes, are players in those classes actually using dual wield combat styles as opposed to sword and board/two-handed?

Virtually all thieves dual wield, as it is to be expected. Most rangers also dual wield, despite it is not supereffective for them. Fighters do not dual wield so often but it is still reasonable they get it since they are the melee class par excellence.