D&D 5E Creative solutions to the hypothetical GWF/Sharpshooter issue

[spinozajack]

Wait, how are you getting five attacks? I get four--two from the attack action at 5th+ level, one for the opportunity attack (which you won't get every round; once someone's closed, and stays close, that ceases to be an option), and one for either the butt-end of the pole-arm or the GWM cleave. But where's the fifth coming from?

I meant if you're a barbarian in frenzy mode. Didn't I say that? Anyway, my point is that buff stacking through multi-attacks is fun, but there is no upside to dual wield in a game, aside from character concept, from a game balance perspective, because dual wielders can't ever benefit from GWM since there are no one-handed heavy weapons.

I think polearms either have to stop being heavy, or the feat needs to be changed to remove the bonus action attack. Or maybe consider the bonus action attack using the butt end isn't considered "heavy" so can't use the -5 / +10 aspect of GWM. But that's fiddly. Better to just remove the bonus action attack. It doesn't need to be there, and worse it steps on the dual wielder's toes too much. Actually, no, more like it steals their lunch money and locks them in their own locker.

 

[Mouseferatu]

But you still won't have five attacks. The extra attack from frenzy costs a bonus action, same as the extra pole arm attack or the extra GWM attack.

 

[spinozajack]

Seeing as how Rangers have the Two-Weapon fighting style, the intent was probably for them to spend one bonus action to cast the spell (like a Barbarian using rage) and then use their subsequent bonus actions to attack. The extra damage triggers on every hit, hitting more times means more damage. They have to re-apply the mark every once in a while true, but it's limited resource to begin with so they wouldn't be doing it every fight, just the important ones.

If you consider a ranger, the iconic TWF guy who picks up the fighting style, the feat, and uses hunter's mark, where is the upside to dual wielding compared to using a polearm?

Let's compare:

Ranger A : 5th level
Fighting style : Two weapon
Feat : Dual Wielder, 1d8 + mods / hand and +1 AC, not compatible with GWF
Attacks : 3x 1d8 + mods
Number of hands required during combat rounds : 2
Number of magic weapons to find / maintain : 2
Max attacks per round that can benefit from hunter's mark : 3


Ranger B: 5th level
Fighting style : Defensive
Feat : Polearm Master, 1d10 + mods and OA reaction, compatible with GWF
Attacks : 2-3x 1d10 + 3, 1x 1d4 + 3, with reach.
Number of weapons to find magic versions of : 1
Number of hands required to hold while not attacking : 1
Max attacks / round that can benefit from Hunter's Mark : 4

Polearm master is strictly superior to dual wielder in every way. On top of the fact that you can also use GWM with it to get 10 more damage per attack.

Dual wielding is the trap option in 5th edition, even for rangers who would otherwise focus on that style and have class features and spells that can be triggered on each attack.

 

[spinozajack]

But you still won't have five attacks. The extra attack from frenzy costs a bonus action, same as the extra pole arm attack or the extra GWM attack.

Ah, good point sir! I didn't think of that. So bear totem it is then, for the polearm wielding barbarians. Which should be every one if they are concerned with being the most effective heavy weapon warriors. As they should be.

 

[Leatherhead]

Max attacks per round that can benefit from hunter's mark : 3

Not to doubt that polearms, and their feat, are better (which is the reasoning behind the point of giving rangers an extra off-hand attack, as we were discussing) But every melee weapon can get an opportunity attack in any given round.

 

[Staffan]

I meant if you're a barbarian in frenzy mode.

Frenzied barbarian plus Polearm Mastery is a bombo. Frenzy gives you an extra attack as a bonus action. So does Polearm Mastery.

Pretty much everything in 5e that gives extra attacks, other than the actual "Extra attack" feature, does so as a bonus action. Dual-wielding, Frenzy, Martial Arts, Charger, Crossbow Expert, Great Weapon Mastery, Polearm Mastery, Swift Quiver. Pretty much the only exceptions are Action Surge and Haste, which both give an actual extra action (the latter of which limits what you can do with that action).

 

[Mephista]

Seeing as how Rangers have the Two-Weapon fighting style, the intent was probably for them to spend one bonus action to cast the spell (like a Barbarian using rage) and then use their subsequent bonus actions to attack. The extra damage triggers on every hit, hitting more times means more damage. They have to re-apply the mark every once in a while true, but it's limited resource to begin with so they wouldn't be doing it every fight, just the important ones.

Except that my experience is that monsters you Mark rarely last for subsequent turns. Only with large Big Bads do you last more than one turn, making TWFing more of a niche thing than a default. With average dpr, running Marks with Duelist style and a shield deals more damage and gives you increased AC.

Generally, Rangers need to mark a monster on the turn that they plan to hit them. Planning ahead rarely works out. This is kind of important, since running bonus-action marks over the course of the adventuring day is actually an important part of the Ranger's power curve.

As for Rogues, why wouldn't you have advantage if you are in melee, and why wouldn't you attack with two weapons when you have advantage? That's 4x the chance for Sneak Attack to trigger.

Ah, advantage only lasts on the first attack, not all of them. And you're setting up to get that advantage with Cunning Action (which is the bonus action you'd normally use for the off hand attack); flanking to get advantage is an alternative rule, not a default, so being in melee doesn't promise advantage. Doesn't quite work that way.

Its generally binary with the Rogue - set up Advantage with Cunning Action, or attack with your off hand. Since the main hand deals more damage due to adding in DEX, advantage is generally better than using off-hand attacks. Only when your party is generating some other form of natural advantage for you outside your turn does it apply.

 

[Leatherhead]

With average dpr, running Marks with Duelist style and a shield deals more damage and gives you increased AC.

Sounds like two-weapon fighting for Rangers needs a boost, perhaps a potential extra attack would help

Ah, advantage only lasts on the first attack, not all of them. And you're setting up to get that advantage with Cunning Action (which is the bonus action you'd normally use for the off hand attack); flanking to get advantage is an alternative rule, not a default, so being in melee doesn't promise advantage.

How does a melee Rogue use Cunning Action to get advantage, without flanking?

Hide explicitly calls out approaching an enemy in combat as something that shouldn't work. Dash or Disengage only work to get you into position for a flank.

 

[Quartz]

Surely a simple fix for polearm abuse is to mandate that you can't have an ally within range? Maybe allow back-to-back.

 

[Mephista]

Sounds like two-weapon fighting for Rangers needs a boost, perhaps a potential extra attack would help

They need something. Too many things competing for that Bonus Action.

How does a melee Rogue use Cunning Action to get advantage, without flanking?

Hide explicitly calls out approaching an enemy in combat as something that shouldn't work. Dash or Disengage only work to get you into position for a flank.

Well, stunting is called out as something that can arrange for it from generous GMs - ingenious players can get advantage for doing cool things with that Cunning Action from standard rules. A melee halfling rogue can use hiding by constantly weaving between can be used between people. Even in combat, people don't have 360 degree vision, so they do have blind sides. A thief can Use An Object, so throwing sand in someone's eyes, or similar, to temporarily blind them would generate Advantage. Arcane Trickster uses the Mage Hand with his Cunning Action to get Advantage.

I could go on; there's plenty of ways. Flanking's just not one of those ways by default. Admittedly, there will be some times it won't work out, and then you can TWF as a backup plan while someone is within 5'. But, in my experience, that second weapon ends up in a belt until needed, and you're relying on just one weapon.