Whirlwind (HLA) question
Tzampapaizeis
Member Posts: 67
Hi.
When you are using improved WW set ur attack per round to 10...how it works when you dual wielding? any extra bonus or just those 10 attacks. with only mainhand? or half with main and half with offhand...any1 knows?
When you are using improved WW set ur attack per round to 10...how it works when you dual wielding? any extra bonus or just those 10 attacks. with only mainhand? or half with main and half with offhand...any1 knows?
0
Comments
WW and Improved Haste double the number of "rounds" you have. So, you'll attack 4+1+4+1 = 10 hits, 8 with main hand and 2 with off hand in a span of single round.
i was sure that WW description was saying something about setting ur attacks per round to 10 not double the numbers or round you got....that why i couldnt find out how it works
Personally I prefer getting 5 APR with Dual Wielding and using Improved Haste to have a passive 10 APR that lasts at least over a turn (10 rounds). This is typically achieved with the scimitar Belm +2, though if memory serves there's also the scarlet ninja-to +3 that only monks (and thieves) can use.
WW + Dual wielding = 8 main hand attacks + 2 off hand attacks
WW + Not dual wielding = 10 main hand attacks
Improved Haste doubles your rounds, but it does not set your APR to 5. So for example Thief with single sword (1 APR) vs. two swords (2 APR) would get benefit from dual wielding.
IH + Dual wielding = 2 main hand attacks + 2 off hand attacks
IH + Not dual wielding = 2 main hand attacks
This doesn't really apply to Fighter/Clerics though, as there are currently no +APR blunt weapons.
GWW is nice and all, and I usually use it for anyone with 2-handers or using a sword & board. The above tactic gives you a far longer duration though, and allows you to use HLAs for other purposes.
Edit: Try it out with a magic missile scroll - you should get 3 regardless of your level.
Edit 2: @Jalily has actually compiled a very useful list of caster level for each spell scroll:
http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/comment/251433/#Comment_251433