What do you expect out of dual wielding?

[Lylandra]

Maybe we should stop believing that dual wielding can be done without a good portion of strength and that there is a massive difference between a dex-based DW and a str-based DW character.

I remember watching a documentary about various weapons and the amount of strength needed to wield them properly. Turned out that even a single rapier in your (strong) main hand would be quite heavy and required lots of strength, so it would be easier for an average fighter to simply use a two handed weapon.

Now if you used something in your other hand as well, this would require far more coordination, strength and training. Especially if the off hand weapon is more than just a dagger.

 

[Arilyn]

Maybe we should stop believing that dual wielding can be done without a good portion of strength and that there is a massive difference between a dex-based DW and a str-based DW character.

I remember watching a documentary about various weapons and the amount of strength needed to wield them properly. Turned out that even a single rapier in your (strong) main hand would be quite heavy and required lots of strength, so it would be easier for an average fighter to simply use a two handed weapon.

Now if you used something in your other hand as well, this would require far more coordination, strength and training. Especially if the off hand weapon is more than just a dagger.

Yes, because right now I'm seeing characters with an 8 Str and a 20 Dex wielding 2 short swords as if they are knitting needles. I know it's a fantasy game full of inaccuracies, but this is ridiculous and far too easy. It's the same problem with bows. Str and Dex are needed to be an effective melee or ranged warrior, but in the game one stat is often ditched for another.

 

[Dieselman]

Lowered AC. Optionally partially recovered or even bettered against certain types of attacks. The AC benefit could depend on the weapons being wielded (by the dual wielder) and also the weapon used to attack said wielder.

 

[Blue]

Lowered AC. Optionally partially recovered or even bettered against certain types of attacks. The AC benefit could depend on the weapons being wielded (by the dual wielder) and also the weapon used to attack said wielder.

You're bringing so new ideas to this. Can you expound on why a lowered AC vs someone with one weapon and an empty hand? And what's the corresponding boost?

 

[Dieselman]

Just for clarity, I'm no swordsman and have NO experience with medieval martial weaponry, but I would assume that it is easier to manipulate your body to allow armor to absorb a blow or to dodge if you don't have to deal with the extra weight or danger of a weapon in your non-attack hand. That's the reason I would give a base detractor to the dual-wielder's AC.

Bonuses could come from players whose style is narrated and understood as providing a defensive technique. In that case, if the attacker was brandishing a rapier, I can see where a dual dagger, rapier, shortsword or maybe scimitar wielding player might gain an AC benefit. I like narration of WHY the character gets that bonus. The player had better have described in advance WHAT their player is capable of any WHY. If it fits with the general vibe, then they absolutely get a bonus. If a player with 2 daggers is facing a foe with a massive battleaxe, warhammer, or other weapon that would not be parried by a light weapon, then they would get no bonus and are just stuck with an extra pointy thing that they've got to be conscious of while attempting to dodge or absorb a blow.

It makes sense to me, but like I said, I'm no expert.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

For dual wielders, they should deal less damage than a 2 handed user. DW lets you split your damage between targets. It lets you have more consistent damage due to multiple attack rolls. You get to dump strength and focus on a stat that lets you avoid attacks, act faster, and use better ranged weapons. That should come at a cost.

DW's ideal place, to me, is above average damage and the ability to pull off certain maneuvers better (disarm, parry, distract). 2 handers should be highest damage with slightly better knockdown/back.

 

[Ancalagon]

In warhammer, an off hand weapon didn't give you an extra attack, it gave you an extra *parry *. This is far closer to reality than the d&d model.

 

[Christopher Olson]

There are some aspects linked to game mechanics, but first of all it is cool.

This.

I just like the flavor of it. Very few things I do in TRPGs are for a mechanical reason.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I always picture dual-wielding as more the rapier-and-dagger style of Musketeers movies, rather than the two-equal-blades style of Drizzt. A main weapon primarily for attack, plus a secondary weapon mostly for parrying, but also to discourage an opponent from getting in close.

D&D doesn't do a great deal to simulate such a style, or indeed any form of swashbuckling - it makes no provision for weapons as a defensive tool. Even the UA Swashbuckler doesn't bring defensive tactics into the mix to any significant degree.

The D&D combat system is still largely abstract featuring static defenses. A trained dual wielder does get a +1 to AC while fighting with two weapons. That along with the parry maneuver is about as defensive as D&D gets. Large piles of ablative hit points do the rest.

Systems that feature active defenses as limited resources and a "hit" as more serious than the loss of a few hp do much more for the defensive properties of shields and other weapons.

 

[Eltab]

I expect to roll more dice, and therefore have a greater chance to hit with something. (I like playing my 5e Monk because it feels like having a do-over roll on a single - small - attack.)
I expect each hit to do less than somebody with a single big attack.
I expect to rarely whiff totally for the turn.

If I manage to hit with everything (stabstabstab), I expect to do about as much damage as when my friend's big two-handed CHOP hits.