Two handed weapons

[galraen]

I tried searching on the subject but failed to turn up any answers, so:

Is it just me or are two handed weapons useless in this game?

I tried creating and developing a fighter specialising in two handed combat and after reaching 12/13th level I got so disgusted with how badly the guy was performing I carried out an experiment.

I used the Respec mod to rebuild the character specialising in dual combat, the difference in effectiveness was astounding. From being a virtually useless warrior he immediately became a one man killing machine. from dealing out paltry damage, when he actually managed to connect, he suddenly started dishing out at least three times as much damage.

That doesn't take into account the speed difference of course. With a Two handed weapon his attacks were so ridiculously slow that usually by the time they came down the target was long gone.

I had spent my skill and talent point exclusively on developing the two weapon style too, so it's not like he was trying to use them with no skill; it looks like a case of very bad development by people who have never bothered to research the subject. Just go out and swing a felling axe a few times and you'll soon realise that the speed with which the game uses for two handers is completely wrong.

The non-existence of enchantable two handed weapons doesn't help either. I've played through doing the Redcliffe/Eamon quest to it's conclusion, the Dwarven and circle quests likewise and not found a single enchantable Zweihander!

[dragon wench]

By far and away, most people will concur that duel wielding is much more effective than a two-handed weapon.
As you note, they hit reasonably hard, but they're quite slow.

Many people will also say that a duel wielding rogue is even more potent than the warrior counterpart. I tend to agree, but I'm also partial to rogues.

I know there are enchantable two-handers in the game (in fact, depending on your party you can get one early on), but you're right, they are a bit more rare.

[galraen]

Sadly there can be no doubt in my mind that the rogue is a far better warrior than the fighter. Very poor game design I'm afraid.

Still enjoying it, but it does make role playing very difficult. Hard to persevere with a warrior when all the time you're thinking 'I should have been a rogue'.

[dragon wench]

My suspicion, and I could be entirely wrong, is that warriors in DAO are based on MMO fighters who are often "tanks" built to withstand a lot of damage but they don't dish it out in the same way that high DPS characters, like rogues and mages, can.

For example, one of my favourite tactics in more difficult battles is to have Alistair directly engage an enemy to provide distraction while Morrigan pelts him/her with spells and my rogue sneaks up from behind.

DAO has a number of MMO influences, so it honestly wouldn't surprise me.

[galraen]

I think the connection may well be valid DW, although I prefer Wynn to Morrigan, something about the name puts me off, not to mention her attitude.

[Scottg]

Sadly there can be no doubt in my mind that the rogue is a far better warrior than the fighter. Very poor game design I'm afraid.

Still enjoying it, but it does make role playing very difficult. Hard to persevere with a warrior when all the time you're thinking 'I should have been a rogue'.

For most of the game I don't think this is correct - at least with respect to melee ability. (..not the case with Awakenings however - because of the advanced levels.)

The Rogue just has to many skills and talents to *want* and not enough of them (early enough) to fulfill that desire - even with the various bonuses in game. THEN compound this with need for multiple attributes and armor, and the Rogue comes up "short" for most of it's build life (..with melee).

The Warrior on the other hand doesn't have that many skills to select, and even fewer that are standouts ("must haves"). Better still, it really needs to focus on only one attribute: Strength, which fulfills its needs for Attack, Damage, and Armor. Even Dexterity (needed for dual-weapon talents), doesn't necessarily need to be that high (especially when considering the Fade bonuses). (..basically Momentum is the character's required "cap" at 24 in Dexterity.) Note however that damage has taken a "hit" with the latest patch with respect to the off-hand dagger damage.

[galraen]

Apart from the necessary attribute's needed for using certain items (strength - about 14 I think), and dexterity for dual weaponry (not that much) everything goes on cunning, so no more diversity than for a fighter in fact. More skill points more than makes up for wanting more to spend.

My experience only goes just past the mid point in the game, but up until then the rogue has definitely been the better damage dealer; assuming of course you make max use of back-stab.

[Scottg]

Apart from the necessary attribute's needed for using certain items (strength - about 14 I think), and dexterity for dual weaponry (not that much) everything goes on cunning, so no more diversity than for a fighter in fact. More skill points more than makes up for wanting more to spend.

My experience only goes just past the mid point in the game, but up until then the rogue has definitely been the better damage dealer; assuming of course you make max use of back-stab.

Cunning doesn't provide better attack numbers. It also doesn't provide access to better armor.

You can achieve better attack numbers via a *very* precise back-stab, or a still reasonably precise back-stab with Combat Movement. You can also garner an addition +10 to attack from the Dualist class and first talent. It still isn't enough however. (..and of course this is assuming you have the opportunity to flank; multiple opponents may be surrounding your Rogue - and that happens quite a lot in this game.) Dirty Fighting helps a lot, but it's not terribly useful against 3+ attackers.

I've tested these combinations out a fair bit, and Fighter-type dual-wielder (strength-based) just plain kills faster under most conditions, and lasts a LOT longer against multiple opponents. (..and the latter is often more important than the former.)

[Scottg]

..and more in keeping with this thread.

The two-handed weapon Warrior is a far more "defensive" character.

Stunning Blows is its Momentum.

Moreover the two-handed weapon Warrior swaps Dexterity for Constitution.

High Armor + good Constitution generally gives you enough time to quaff a healing potion. Only disabling effects can really take-down a well-built (and played) Two-handed weapon Warrior. (..and even that's often difficult because of it's high physical resistance and access to Indomitable for mental effects.)

[Catcher9]

Scotty is already covering this fairly well, but I thought I'd add my two coppers. The two-handed warrior in DA:O is far more important than vanilla DPS analysis would indicate. Indomitable is a cheap Talent that is highly useful in most combats since many opponents like the use of knockdown/stun effects. Both Sunder Arms and Sunder Armor have the unnoted benefit of triggering a double-stroke attack on top of their debilitating effects. The aforementioned Stunning Blows is a passive Talent which can be combined with the first tier Mighty Blow for a powerful effect. Short of magic, there is no better way to clear a crowd than Two Handed-Sweep. While some of these are higher tier Talents, several are easily available to a level 10-11ish character. Hope this helps.

[dragon wench]

Once rogues get "Coup de Grace" and Lethality, they are deadly. My rogue, hands down, puts out far more damage than Alistair. Once, as an experiment, I created a new save and respeced Alistair into a Duel weilding fighter, my rogue still left him in the dust.

As far as Two-handed goes, I always respec Ogrin into a sword and board, he does better damage that way and he dies less often.

*shrug* Or, maybe it's just that I have a natural bias against metal-suit wearing brutes

This stuff is all pretty subjective, I've seen raging debates on several boards:
rogue vs warrior
two-handed vs one-handed

In all honesty, I'm not sure there are any conclusive answers. As the expression goes, "Opinions are like certain bodily orifices, everyone has one and they all stink."

[galraen]

Not really Catcher9, I had all the Skills you mentioned and his damage output was pathetic compared to what he put out when rebuilt with dual classing.

@ScottG Cunning does however add a lot to damage, and actually hitting the target has never been a problem.

Different strokes and all that; but in my experience, based on observation, a dual wielding fighter outperforms a two-handed wielding fighter, and a dual wielding rogue beats both of them. The single biggest hitter on one attack though has been Lerian (sp?) with a bow using Slayer, no other one shot damage has come even close to her performance.

[Scottg]

Different strokes and all that; but in my experience, based on observation, a dual wielding fighter outperforms a two-handed wielding fighter, and a dual wielding rogue beats both of them. The single biggest hitter on one attack though has been Lerian (sp?) with a bow using Slayer, no other one shot damage has come even close to her performance.

Outperforms? Or simply out-kills?

THAT's the real crux of the issue that I (and Catcher9) are suggesting.

I don't think there is any real question that a purpose built and well played Dual-wielder will almost always provide more single-target damage than a Two-handed weapon build - it's what they are supposed to do.

But as far as *outperforming* is concerned.. I can't agree.

I would agree that a well built and played Two-Handed Weapon build is better than a Shield build, but they are far more similar in their build and use.

Note though, like you - I by *far* prefer the dual-wielder. I like killing one opponent after then next in quick succession. I'm also not fond of constantly quaffing healing potions (Two-handed build), or having my characters "killed", or reloading (..both of which pertain to a Rogue dual-wield build).

[Crenshinibon]

Honestly, I have to say that my favorite class in Dragon Age is the Warrior specializing in two handed-weapons. Personally, I feel that they are very solid characters if used correctly. First of all, if you time their abilities right, they will attack just as fast as their Sword and Shield counterparts. Their talents are very solid too. Indomitable I would say is their trademark - having immunity to stun and knockdown is simply priceless.

A lot of the two-handed talents have very short cooldowns, meaning that they are very much spammable and a good portion of these talents are area of effect provide a semi-disable effect. Keep in mind that this type of warrior is also effective against tank type characters due to sunder armor, which essentially provides bonus damage to the entire party.

If it were possible to have your characters fight each other, I'd go as far as to say that the two-handed warrior could very well defeat the dual wielder.

[galraen]

My biggest gripe with the two-handed fighter is the chronic slowness of his attacks; I wasn't joking, or exaggerating when I said that his target was gone before the attack he launched arrived on a regular basis.

@ScottG Surely dealing out more damage within a given amount of time, and therefore more kills, is outperforming?

[Crenshinibon]

With animation canceling, the two-handed warrior attacks as fast as Alistair. I soloed the character all the way through the original campaign and I know that the Indomitable talent gives huge points to the two-hander (especially since it means that you won't get knocked around by dragons, ogres and bashers).

Anyway, back to animation canceling, the full attack animation is actually much longer than the time it takes to inflict damage. The sword, axe or maul goes from top all the way to the bottom, when striking an enemy (something like that), but the damage is done somewhere halfway, so as soon as you see the damage float, you use a skill to immediately attack again (such as Sunder Arms and Armor, which are actually TWO attacks, not one).

Also, keep in mind that unlike the dual wielder, the two-hander has added effects to his attacks, such as sunder or stun. By the time I finished the game, my character did over a hundred damage per hit.

Yes, the dual wielder outperforms the two-hander if left alone, but if you micromanage (like the Bard in the Baldur's Gate series), the character turns out to be very powerful.

They can be evenly matched since the the two-hander is clearly better at performing area of effect attacks than the dual wielder.

[Scottg]

My biggest gripe with the two-handed fighter is the chronic slowness of his attacks; I wasn't joking, or exaggerating when I said that his target was gone before the attack he launched arrived on a regular basis.

@ScottG Surely dealing out more damage within a given amount of time, and therefore more kills, is outperforming?

Performance is always predicated on the ability to survive. If you can kill 5 opponents quickly, but are felled by the 6th or 7th opponent - it's not going to do you much good. If on the other hand it takes you longer to kill 5 to 10 opponents, BUT you survive the battle - then which do you think performs better?

The attack speed is even worse with Precise Striking active. But the +10 to attack is often worth the -10% attack speed (unless the opponents are "trash" i.e. easy to hit).

Against single opponents "spam" Mighty Blow, if they are likely to have a high physical resistance you can use Critical Strike instead.

Against multiple opponents use Threaten followed by several successive Two-Handed Sweeps.

[Scottg]

I should also mention weapon use..

For a dual-wield Warrior the primary weapon is clearly the sword (..dagger for Rogue). The attack time, armor penetration, damage, and rune slots all in combination favor the sword (..or long sword).

For a Two-handed weapon user there isn't really a set weapon to use - it's more application specific. In this respect it allows a bit more flexibility to the character - say perhaps increasing armor penetration, increasing criticals, or increasing attack numbers - perhaps even a special effect or elemental or spell resist. The only real down-side to this is you end up spending a bit more on additional Runes, and of course you need to select the best weapon for the particular encounter.

[GoldDragon]

I have had Sten and Oghren as Two-handers (and Oghren in both games) Outperforming My rogues (altho I must admit that I insist that Leliana be an archer) late-game.

Typically, I have them use Indomitable excessively (Sword & Shield version is Shield Wall + Shield Mastery, btw) with around 30 con plus High strength.

Sten was able to take down Loghain with only 1 Health Poltice. Alistair tends to need 3, and I don't let rogues or mages fight in a battle that technically should only be fought by warriors. Yes, I know fully well that the ONLY companion not able to do that fight is the Dog.

[galraen]

Thanks for the animation info Crenshinibon, that does make a difference, but it still doesn't help when the target isn't getting hit because it's moved out of the way.

As for performance being predicated on the ability to survive; if my rogue actually dies I may reconsider this; although I'll be more likely to kick myself for screwing up!

I'm not actually sure I agree with the idea of using two daggers, they may be faster, but the initial hit when backstabbing is so much higher with a sword that most opponents don't survive long enough for the dagger speed to make a difference.