Dual-Wield Feats

[Vaardalia]

Hello,

I am going 20 levels of Bard, and I would like to dual-wield. I plan to go Spellsinger as my enchantment build, and use my SP for healing and buffing. As a result two of my feats will reflect this; the rest of the feats will go towards a dual-wield set up. My concern is that as a Bard, dual-wield may leave me un-prepared for a high level of DC checks that may be expected of all Bards now (I remember a few months back one of the five Bard types was dual-wield). My race is Half-Elf, my Dex is 17 base and my Str is 16 Base, so I should meet the feat requirements.

Feats:
Maximize Spell
Extend Spell
Dual-Wield
Improve Dual-Wield
Greater Dual-Wield
Weapon Proficiency: Kopesh
Oversized Two Weapon Fighting

Thanks in advance!

[Kinerd]

The main difficulty I think you will have is not having enough HP. With 17 base Dex and 16 base Str, you only have 9 build points left on a 32 point build to put in Cha and Con, and without Toughness even if you put them all in Con (starting with 8(!) Cha) you're only looking at 120 (dice) + 20 (heroic) + 10 (draconic) + 60 (base) + 80 (6 item, 2 tome) + 45 (green steel) + 30 (gfl) + 20 (item toughness) = 385 HP. That's dangerously low for a melee that has neither AC nor evasion.

You could start Dex at 15 instead and use a +2 tome, which would help a little, but not much. It's just hard to get 4 stats up.

If you went THF instead of TWF, you would have 2 more feat slots to play with and one less stat to worry about. By taking at least one Toughness, you could go Barbarian dilettante and get yourself 22 + 20 + 30 = 72 more HP, which would go a long way towards making this build more survivable in melee.

[Tuney]

You can add +2 expectional Con. And While you can get an odd stat with con, race is half-elf can use human adabitablity to go to an even number or use a +1 exp con for an extra Con step or even with an extream ammount of grinding (Or luck) do both and use Litny of the dead.

Then Rage (Easy access as a bard) spell, with a little bit of work can get Yugo con pots for +2 con and +20 hp.

I say if you really need/want the toughness drop the Oversized weapon. Toughness and the AP spent into enchantments are mostly useful for players with slower reflexes and reaching/overacheaving HP threasholds wanted for tanking high burst damage bosses.

[Noctus]

TWF + offensive casting ---> you run short on buildpoints, leading to hurtful compromises.

Choose one and drop the other, or in the higer level you likely will be caught sitting between two chairs and not be able to satisfactorily perform in any category.

[RobinofSpiritwood]

If you are doing heals & buffs, why worry about DC's?
You won't be able to hit through the DC/SR of most high level monsters with enchantments anyway. If you have to do CC, you have Fascinate to fall back on. So- no need to concern yourself with that stuff.

Pure bards are feat starved, and cannot max both melee and casting abilities. This is probably by design. Deciding where to micrometer the scale on a pure bard is a personal choice, and playstyle can compensate for build problems: you'll hit relatively hard with the bard buffs as a dual wielder- and can rely on Diplomacy to help with aggro like a rogue.
If you want better combat abilities, multiclassing with a melee class for feats/BAB or rogue for SA are options.

[tekkentroop]

I think that WP: Khopesh and OTWF are not a good idea on a feat starved build. Go for rapiers and get improved crit: piercing (unless you got 2 min II khopeshes in tr cache) and toughness. Think about dropping extend for power attack.

[FrozenNova]

You will deal more damage and be a more potent caster if you stick to THF. Those build points are better elsewhere, and it's minimally necessary to actually take the THF feats, freeing up a pile of feats.

[tekkentroop]

TWF is more damage on a bard than THF, period. Since the OP plans to go Helf, he will even benefit more from TWF assuming he gets rogue dilly.

Of course, thf is ideal for builds who want to melee without spending feats and build points in dex (battle cleric, WF FVS), but thats not what the OP wanted.

[Stitch78]

I am going 20 levels of Bard, and I would like to dual-wield. I plan to go Spellsinger as my enchantment build, and use my SP for healing and buffing. As a result two of my feats will reflect this; the rest of the feats will go towards a dual-wield set up. My concern is that as a Bard, dual-wield may leave me un-prepared for a high level of DC checks that may be expected of all Bards now (I remember a few months back one of the five Bard types was dual-wield). My race is Half-Elf, my Dex is 17 base and my Str is 16 Base, so I should meet the feat requirements.

If you want a DPS bard, this isn't the ideal set up. The Spellsinger PrE lends itself to crowd control casting. You're BAB will only be 3/4 that of a fighter, and your STR will be low, so even if you swapped out a feat to get Power Attack, you will be misssing a lot (Divine Power clickies will help though) and your damage won't be that impressive. And as a front-line melee, you lack the evasion/hitpoints to be able to take repeated hits. You can compensate by keeping Rage/Displacment/GH/damage-enhancement clickies going, but I still think you will be spending a lot of time self-healing rather than swinging.

I would consider either (i) dropping dual wielding, grabbing a falchion and focusing on casting (spell penetration for later levels) or (ii) dropping dual wielding, grabbing at least one Toughness feat (maybe 2?), dropping DEX and boosting both CON and CHA. You should have at least 14 CON and 14 CHA on a Spellsinger. 16 of both is better and 18 CHA is ideal. You can safely drop STR to 14 to make that work.

If you are doing heals & buffs, why worry about DC's?

If you are not going to worry about DC's, why go Spellsinger?

[Alektronic]

"DC" reads like a typo in original post .

[Kmnh]

Yes, you can pull that off, but don't expect to lead the kill counts or anything like that.

Don't bother taking power attack, you won't hit anything on endgame content with PA on, unless you have some serious gear to back you up.

As one poster said, don't use khopeshes yet. You can swap the proficiency feat in later, when you build your greensteel. (I mean a pair of basic ones, not the fully upgraded versions)

Impoved Critical: Slashing is better than OTWF if you won't have power attack.

Keep your parties hasted and they will love you ^^

[Gorbadoc]

My concern is that as a Bard, dual-wield may leave me un-prepared for a high level of DC checks that may be expected of all Bards now.

Correct.

TWF + offensive casting ---> you run short on buildpoints, leading to hurtful compromises.

Choose one and drop the other, or in the higer level you likely will be caught sitting between two chairs and not be able to satisfactorily perform in any category.

^^This. And, in fact, while feats are a major stumbling block, the thing that separates melee DPS bards from offensive casting bards is ability scores. If you want spell DCs, you want every freaking little +1 you can get, which means pumping charisma. Melee ability is a bit more flexible, and indeed a caster bard should still carry a decent melee weapon, since there are times where even a little bit of extra DPS helps. Conventional wisdom, though, is that if melee is how you'll spend most of your time, you should pump strength, make constitution a high priority, and satisfy your TWF dex requirement (though there are plenty of good melee bards that fight with two-handers).

I remember a few months back one of the five Bard types was dual-wield.

Er. I can think of more than five spectra along which to measure a bard.

• Offensive casting
• Melee DPS
• Hitpoints
• Spell-based healing
• Wand/Scroll-based healing
• Stealth
• Song-based CC

Bard is an extremely customizable class. Sure, the rules preclude some possible combinations of the above (such as maxed DPS and maxed Offensive casting), and some combinations synergize better than others. It's disingenuous to say there are five types of bard, though.

TWF is more damage on a bard than THF, period. Since the OP plans to go Helf, he will even benefit more from TWF assuming he gets rogue dilly.

Of course, thf is ideal for builds who want to melee without spending feats and build points in dex (battle cleric, WF FVS), but thats not what the OP wanted.

I'm not sure the OP knew what he wanted. TWF is a large build investment that gives more DPS potential than THF. This potential is only realized, though, when you compare a melee-specced THF build to a melee-specced TWF build. The good THF build doesn't lag horribly behind the good TWF build, and the THF build has a bit more flexibility in fitting other abilities. On a build that makes the investment in offensive casting (pumped Charisma, multiple casting feats), stats and feats will be so tight that DPS should come out higher if the OP simply dumps dex and plans to melee with a two-hander. The advantages of THF here are:

• Much higher strength and constitution thanks to dumping dexterity
• Power Attack is more viable, both in its to-hit penalty and in terms of fitting in the feat
• Extra damage from the above sources (two-handed weapons get more damage from strength bonus and power attack than one-handers).

The first two advantages are minor issues if we're comparing two builds that have nothing better to do with stats and feats than Str, Dex, Con, and melee feats; they're HUGE issues when the build is trying to cram high Charisma and casting feats.

[Vaardalia]

I was going with the idea that buffs and heals do not need DC checks to compensate for my base Char of 18, while keeping my songs strong with 20 levels of Bard. While the capstone will not be worthless, it will be "worth" less to my DW build. I am using the short sword combo from the Lord's March quest line with the vampire effect and I seem to do good. I also made two of the stone turning Khopeshs from the same quest line, DW them w/ the hit penalty from not have them proficient, and off weighted and still had a + 33 to hit at level 13 with buffs to try them out in sands. The stone turning was nice, but 1d8 dmg vs. 1d6 did not seem worth another two feats to use them correctly for a x3 crit vs 2x. Right now with gear / enchantments, I am running at 22 Str 24 Dex 22 Con 24 Int 22 Wis and 24 Char, with a + 39 to hit self buff first swing and 174 HP + 33 from songs and GH. I like the spellsinger because the songs replenish SP and I can buff my whole group and still have SP for backup healing and keeping haste up more often. Basically I am trying to cross that thin line of hybrid you're not suppose to in DDO. So far I am loving the feedback and ideas! > <

[Gorbadoc]

I plan to go Spellsinger as my enchantment build

I was going with the idea that buffs and heals do not need DC checks to compensate for my base Char of 18, while keeping my songs strong with 20 levels of Bard.

Ah, I misunderstood; I thought you were getting delusions of being able to go full TWF on a build that uses enchantment spells.

Yeah, you should be fine building a melee bard who happens to have the Spellsinger enhancements, decent healing, and song-based CC. You won't be as strong a caster as a Spellsinger Classic Rocker (an easy enough modification; Classic Rocker already has the feat for it), but the build should bear a striking resemblance.

I'm not sure I'm following your stats. Conventional wisdom says:
- Barely enough Dexterity to make the 17 mark with whatever kind of tome you can get your hands on (16 if you're poor and can only get a +1; 15 if you can get a +2; 14 if you somehow have a +3 lying around that you want to eat).
- 12 Charisma (some people go as low as 10; if you wanted Paladin Dilettante there'd be an argument for 14; in any event, it's not a stat worth pumping)
- A few points for Intelligence if your skills plan requires it
- Everything else split between Strength and Constitution (16str/14con is a sign that you're stretched about as thin as I personally would dare to go).

As for feats, I'd lean toward:
Toughness
TWF
Maximize
Power Attack
Imp Crit
ITWF
GTWF

It's tough, though; to save the party's bacon with cures at high level, Quicken is good. Then, of course, I neglected Extend-- it's not essential, but it is nice to have.

And, because I've seen at least one instance of questionable word-choice in this thread:
PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT: "Enchantment" and "Enhancement" are two different words. They mean multiple completely different things in DDO jargon. It's anyone's guess what the devs were smoking when they decided to include in the game two jargon terms that sound so similar, but here we are. Maybe they thought it wouldn't be true D&D if we didn't have our own equivalent of Level Confusion.

[WeaselKing]

This set up leaves you ineligible for Warchanter, which I would think you would want for a melee bard.

[Gorbadoc]

This set up leaves you ineligible for Warchanter, which I would think you would want for a melee bard.

You'd be surprised.

+2 damage (song), +1 attack (song), +1 attack (weapon focus) = +2/+2 attack/damage that you miss out on by not going War Chanter. If you can make good use of the Spellsinger special abilities (which, a healing specced melee bard should be able to do), there's a solid argument for either PrE.

Virtuoso still sits in the corner and cries, of course, wishing the devs would get around to debugging his abilities.

[Vaardalia]

I am a 36 point build with Rogue and Wizard as my two past lives. So far I have gotten yelled at for not having 23 base char, for meleeing dual-wield, and told if you multi-class Bard you're just a half-rate melee fooling yourself into believing your songs make up for your multi-class. I do see enough Bard multi-class with Rog, or Barb, Fighter etc to know not all Bards are suppose to start out with 8 str 18 con 8 dex 8 int 8 wis and 18 char, its just the player base seems to ignore it. It is refreshing to know that 18 Char can be considered too much for what I want to do, and some people think dual-wield is a valid way to go.

I did have a question, someone suggested I dual-wield Rapiers, I was wondering if they count as light weapons so you can dual-wield without the weighted penalty?

Thanks again for all the help!

[Gorbadoc]

Yeah, don't get me wrong, the extra SP from a higher charisma are useful, but they're useful the way that free set of measuring cups are with purchase of an electric mixer. You've already got a measuring cup; owning another is just a minor convenience. You buy the mixer for the mixer, not the free extras. Similarly, you pump charisma past 12 (or 10 or 14) for the spell DCs, not the SP or even the UMD.

Say a dungeon pushes your party to its limit. Everyone runs out of SP and abilities by the time you reach the end. What's going to help the party more: you having 150 extra SP because you pumped charisma, or if you killed monsters faster and died less easily because you had more strength and constitution?

And of course, once monsters are dead (which tends to happen more easily if you have that strength and constitution), you can cure up with wands at your leisure.

[dkyle]

I am a 36 point build with Rogue and Wizard as my two past lives. So far I have gotten yelled at for not having 23 base char, for meleeing dual-wield, and told if you multi-class Bard you're just a half-rate melee fooling yourself into believing your songs make up for your multi-class. I do see enough Bard multi-class with Rog, or Barb, Fighter etc to know not all Bards are suppose to start out with 8 str 18 con 8 dex 8 int 8 wis and 18 char, its just the player base seems to ignore it. It is refreshing to know that 18 Char can be considered too much for what I want to do, and some people think dual-wield is a valid way to go.

Dual-wield is absolutely a valid way to go. Just not not so much dual-wield plus offensive casting. Pick one or the other.

My Bard has an 18 starting STR, 14 starting DEX (with a +3 tome), 16 starting CON, and an 8 starting CHA (with a +4 tome). You can just focus on DPS. Yeah, you're not going to do as much as an equivalently geared Barbarian, but my well-geared Bard easily out-DPSes many less-well-geared Fighters and Barbs.

[Kinerd]

Rapiers are finessable but not light.