First, that's not what I said. TWF is the go to for a single class, Rogues who doesn't even care about the effectiveness of the fighting style they are just taking ever they can to get second chance to trigger Backstab, they don't even consider it effective as a fighting style options. I have never had a player willing to use two weapon fighting that was not a rogue since 5e.
How is leveling an ability making it the best? By definition, leveling implies the TWF is below and is being raised to even. It has deficiencies that other fighting styles don't have to perform their function, which Mearls Recognized in his redesign, so lets be clear its not JUST ME saying this. I have heard it from every player at my table as GM and player and multiple other people have posted similar suggestions to mine. What I find interesting here is your not ageing for flaws or balance in my idea with any intent to improve or shape it. Your just accusing me of doing something that is AGAINST my stated goals. If your saying I missed my mark the elaborate but your attacking the concept of altering two-weapon fighting to remove a deficiency and give it a niche by saying it becomes god of all style. Which you fail to support in any meaningful way entirely even knowing its not just me saying this. Why are you coming to a thread to be completely unproductive and attack generally? If you want to argue against two-weapon fighting changes... MAKE SOME ACTUAL POINTS AND SUGGESTS. Don't just make vague pointless picks at peoples wording and idea structure. Make a point or counter a point on a suggestion a of your own.
I am sorry, but do you think Two weapon fighting is a rogue feature? I like two weapon fighters and Ranger but they don't hold up in this edition but all you want to talk about it the one class that doesn't care about the fighting style for the fighting style. Your missing the point in that Rogues don't care if TWF is viable. They just want another attack. If you want to level rogues to use other fighting styles all you have to do is give them extra attack at level 5, but that is not the topic of this thread.
I believe that Two Handed weapon fighting should (and was in previous editions) be viable for more than just rogues who aren't using it for its effectiveness but just a trigger for backstab. I do believe the each fighting style should have its niche, and I believe my design does that making a one on one "dueling style" which is unique where great weapons usually do better vs low AC targets, and polearms will continue to be useful as harassment weapon with reach and polearm master for better damage and target versatility fighting multiple higher AC enemies. So what is your actual agreement here? Nothing I am saying is against this and their is no reason each fighting style can't both have a niche and a basic balance.
5ekyu, you and me have had a lot of conversations over the last year and a half on this forum and your a usually a pretty sharp person with some good points. Not sure what's going on here but this post is leaning more to hate speech and blind venting. Are you ok? Do you need to take offline about something? If you want to through out some real feed back, of which I know you are capable... please do! I am interested in what you have to say but this is really the most hollow post I have ever seen from you and honestly makes me worried as it makes it seem like your here but distracted with IRL issues.
Ok to lead off - I think your last graph with its reference liking my post to hate speech and blind venting with its questioning my fitness to post (obliquely) is essentially a personal attack.
Now for your points...
First graph you reference the only rogues revision. But in the post I responded to you saifpd in fact not revision "These changes for TWF are NOT for rogues but a change for characters that actually fight with their weapons instead of using them to deliver a special ability like backstab. "
If you had meant only rogues only backstab perhaps you should not have included the reference to the broader cases - effect deliverers.
On the second - as you state, these changes are not for rogues but for others. Leveling the TWF for non-rogues and still leaving it as go-to for rogues is **not leveling** as much as it's making it the one stop for top.
I am sure you can see and know that one form of leveling is for different choices to be best when paired with different choices and worse with others. Right now in 5e the great axe and rogue is an example that's a worse. At the same time TWF and rogue is pretty good.
Over on the fighter side, some see TWF as the worse in that pair of options - greataxe or twf build.
That creates a leveling - each has a place they do better and a place they do eorse.
But you apparently want to "level" the TWF for the fighter vs twf & greataxe.
Well, that's great but at the same time you need to also provide "leveling" for the greataxe rogue new rules **or** you are not really leveling anything, just creating an imbalance.
The key is this - balance is not gained by looking at one side in isolation for something this complex.
So, if you want to provide some comprehensive set of changes to "level" rogue and fighter and paladin and ranger across all weapon style combat sets - by all means do. It likely has to start with them all getting martial proficiencies and shields - so that none require feats or MC fo get even access to certain styles and combos.
5e obviously was not built with that type of "leveling" or sameness in mind.
But as long as your leveling only applies one way to one set for one class (primarily) and leaves the unleveled cases for others, it's pretty much built on a foundation of sand as far as it bring a valid approach toward balance or leveling.
But the system as currently built takes a more diverse approach, leaving some combos better for some classes and others for others.
