Low AC vs dual-wielding.

[Bruce Lee]

What are your opinions in this matter?
I used to go for dual-wielding but lately I have discovered that low AC can be really helpful. Not many monsters have a negative thac0 and only dragons have thac0 lower than -10(I think). In any case if you AC is around -20 you will hardly ever get hit. AC -20 can be obtained by playing a swashbuckler dualed to fighter and having a shield equipped. If you are wearing the red dragon scale, the sentinel and girdle of bluntness plus ring of gaxx and ring of protection +2 etc. you can have an effective AC of -24 or better vs all attacks.
This is in my mind better than dual wielding.

[The_Pope]

Shields or for wimps not capable of handling 2 weapons at the same time.



Hmm... I wonder if I prefer a mere shield in my offhand or that sweet Crom Faeyr? Hmm...

[ 04-09-2001: Message edited by: The_Pope ]

[two]

Originally posted by Bruce Lee:
<STRONG>What are your opinions in this matter?
I used to go for dual-wielding but lately I have discovered that low AC can be really helpful. Not many monsters have a negative thac0 and only dragons have thac0 lower than -10(I think). In any case if you AC is around -20 you will hardly ever get hit. AC -20 can be obtained by playing a swashbuckler dualed to fighter and having a shield equipped. If you are wearing the red dragon scale, the sentinel and girdle of bluntness plus ring of gaxx and ring of protection +2 etc. you can have an effective AC of -24 or better vs all attacks.
This is in my mind better than dual wielding.</STRONG>

Personally I think you are onto something!!!
I suspect that in Throne of BHall most average/upper average monsters won't be able to hit AC-20 very often, but AC-10 regularly. I also suspect AC higher than -20 WILL be calculated. AND that when monsters start dishing out 20-30 damage/attack with 4-5 attacks a round, the best fighter around is going to be a unhit fighter.

Please note that it would take very little to make a shield worth using...for example a shield giving +6 to AC and 30% magic resistance would probably be enough to edge out an extra weapon attack. I expect some very powerful shields in the expansion; a shield companion for the holy avenger and the like.

[Angelus]

Originally posted by Bruce Lee:
<STRONG>...you can have an effective AC of -24 or better vs all attacks.
This is in my mind better than dual wielding.</STRONG>

I think that's contradictory in itself.
What will happen if you unequip the shield? You'll still have an AC of about -20, that's still more than enough against just about anyone.

I'd prefer wielding a powerfull second weapon like the CFs or the Flail of Ages anytime, for the extra attack and the specials that they give. Perhaps the only exception is the Shield of Balduran when fighting beholders.

[two]

Originally posted by Angelus:
<STRONG>I think that's contradictory in itself.
What will happen if you unequip the shield? You'll still have an AC of about -20, that's still more than enough against just about anyone.

I'd prefer wielding a powerfull second weapon like the CFs or the Flail of Ages anytime, for the extra attack and the specials that they give. Perhaps the only exception is the Shield of Balduran when fighting beholders.</STRONG>

I agree right now a shield is worthless; hell most special weapons give better bonuses than shields. I expect this to change with new greatly improved shields (for example a shield giving +1 attack per round plus great defense, etc.). If in TOB shields don't "catch up" to weapons like FOAges or the HolyA, nobody will use them.

[Angelus]

I agree that it might be a point in the future, but I also expect some improved armor to appear in ToB, for those who still don't want to use shields.
Btw a shield for the Holy Avenger would be useles since it's a two handed sword.

[two]

Originally posted by Angelus:
<STRONG>I agree that it might be a point in the future, but I also expect some improved armor to appear in ToB, for those who still don't want to use shields.
Btw a shield for the Holy Avenger would be useles since it's a two handed sword.</STRONG>

Duh! Good point. I was, however, talking about the Holy Avenger toothpick, it spears meat chunks from between your teeth with unparalleled accuracy!

[Craig]

Halberds away, Um sorry but you've left two handed weapons out i made a charector who has done 26 (halberd) damage none critical using normal starting lvl norm weapon two and you can get weap speed down to 3!! and theres dragon breath, come-on there isnt a single thing imune to all those damage thingys so think about it

[Nighthawk]

Originally posted by two:
<STRONG>I agree right now a shield is worthless; hell most special weapons give better bonuses than shields.</STRONG>

Imo there are a couple shields worth using in BG2, though mostly in special circumstances: Balduran vs Beholders, Harmony vs Spellcaster especially at relatively low level, and Reflection for Aerie or Viconia or another shield capable non-melee character.

<STRONG>I expect this to change with new greatly improved shields (for example a shield giving +1 attack per round plus great defense, etc.). If in TOB shields don't "catch up" to weapons like FOAges or the HolyA, nobody will use them.</STRONG>

If a shield gave +1 attack, it would immediately be a strong competitor against dual wielding since +1 attack is the biggest advantage dual wielding gives. Having multiple kinds of weapon attacks is a trade off with having all your attacks come from the weapon of your choice. Still, it's going to be hard for a shield to displace the 25 Str for Crom Faeyr in the off hand or the slow effect of the FoA.

As an aside, the FoA and Crom Faeyr both kick butt over the 'teaser' items I've seen for TOB so far. The rumored FoA +5 is going to be awesome though, especially if it picks up abilities with the upgrade beyond the +4 damage (2 crushing, 1 electrical?, 1 poison?).

[rapier]

Well, I have Minsc using Equaliser and Sentinel and he dishes out around 15 damage every hit, pretty fast attacks and 9 out of 10 hit...

[fable]

It depends on the character, the situation, and your party. Relatively early in the game when a character is hurting badly and faced with powerful physical attacks, a shield can make the difference between survival and death. Later on, when you have great stuff and powerful defensive spells, it makes sense to put a couple of proficiency points into dual weapons--less to gain additional attacks (IMO than to gain the benefits attached to magical weapons.

[Saigo]

My dual-weilding Swashbuckler, at level twenty-three, has an AC of -12 and regenerates 6hp per round (ring of Gaxx, ring of regeneration and boots of speed). He hardly ever gets hit and is usually healed by the time he gets hit again. But because of the damage he inflicts, his enemies usually don't last that long.

[two]

Originally posted by Saigo:
<STRONG>My dual-weilding Swashbuckler, at level twenty-three, has an AC of -12 and regenerates 6hp per round (ring of Gaxx, ring of regeneration and boots of speed). He hardly ever gets hit and is usually healed by the time he gets hit again. But because of the damage he inflicts, his enemies usually don't last that long. </STRONG>

Um guys... remember it doesn't matter much how great you are in BGII if in BGIII AC-12 is hit by an average monster for 20+ points a hit (multiple hits/round). That will nullify both AC and Regen...

My point is that I can forsee a point where the monsters catch up with -12 AC and will pound it regularly, and that a shield giving +6 or more to AC (making -12 into -18, or -17 into -23) will at that point begin to look attractive.

Sure you will always get better armor as well, but put a great shield on improved armor and when what do u get? I think -25 will be possible for extreme AC (unmodified by spells/bards). Maybe -15 will be average for a fighter, -10 for lesser fighers (bards, etc.).

I guess we won't know until the expansion, until then YES shileds suck, use 2 weapons!

[Saigo]

two, yor point would be well taken except for one thing: do you think that the designers have given shield-carrying characters the ability to compete without increasing the available protection for sheildless ones? I'm sure they've taken care of the theives, archers, and dual-weilders too. Not to mention the two-handed weapon weilders.

[Bruce Lee]

I was doing some testing using the sentinel. Having a shield proved to be better than dualwielding in most cases. The only case that dual wielding is better is IMO in player vs player. I am currently playing a swashbuckler dualed to fighter at level 10. He has Crom Fayer nad Flail of the Ages in his quickweapons slots and his first attack is with the Flail and then with CF. It is unnecessary to keep hitting with the flail. Slow lasts for 20 seconds, so once every 20 seconds is enough. However no monster lasts 20 seconds.