Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Oh, I know. WotC no longer makes a game I want to play.Then D&D 5e is not the game for you.
Oh, I know. WotC no longer makes a game I want to play.Then D&D 5e is not the game for you.
Availability? Awareness? Flair?In what simulation would anyone risk their live without having the strongest combination of skills and powers they can could?
Not really. TBH, it does seem pretty odd to me that everyone in 5e can fight with two weapons at the same time without some measure of training. Instead of not being able to add their DEX modifier to their offhand attack, their primary and offhand attacks should be done at Disadvantage.So, are you asking why everyone being able to make a single bonus action attack with their off-hand,
In 3.5, those penalties could be reduced to -2 to your main hand and -2 to your offhand by picking up the Two-Weapon Fighting feat and wielding a light weapon in your offhand. Later on, you could pick up Improved Two-Weapon Fighting and Greater Two-Weapon Fighting to increase the number of offhand attacks.looking it up you got a single extra attack with your off-hand, as long as you took a -6 penalty to your main hand and a -10 penalty to your off-hand...
Have you role-played a martial with this fighting style?I'm not seeing the nerf anywhere.
The technique would spread. If only because being able to safely kill things means you come back alive when others don't.Availability? Awareness? Flair?
The technique would spread. If only because being able to safely kill things means you come back alive when others don't.
Every army in the world switch to guns over swords, because it's just a better technique. Took a few generations, but every soldier is aware of and has access to guns.
And you don't risk your life for Flair.
Hence "military".We're getting back into "why doesn't every peasant simply become a master wizard" style logic. There are (usually) meaningful barriers to (greater) power, including but not limited to; knowledge, and access.
Global knowledge and access to whatever is best at killing without being killed is going to spread.They did! But when global knowledge of and access to firearms became the norm, and not before. D&D armed forces (typically) do not feature dragoons/other firearm wielding troops, because they lack knowledge of and access to them. Same applies to more individual cases and exotic sources of power.
Fair.Some people/characters definitely risk their lives for flair. Ill-advisedly, for sure, but.
Not really. TBH, it does seem pretty odd to me that everyone in 5e can fight with two weapons at the same time without some measure of training. Instead of not being able to add their DEX modifier to their offhand attack, their primary and offhand attacks should be done at Disadvantage.
In 3.5, those penalties could be reduced to -2 to your main hand and -2 to your offhand by picking up the Two-Weapon Fighting feat and wielding a light weapon in your offhand. Later on, you could pick up Improved Two-Weapon Fighting and Greater Two-Weapon Fighting to increase the number of offhand attacks.
Have you role-played a martial with this fighting style?
You don't usually play as a peasant.
Global knowledge and access to whatever is best at killing without being killed is going to spread.
In what simulation would anyone risk their live without having the strongest combination of skills and powers they can could?
Compared to how 3.0/3.5 was penalizing anyone who used Two-Weapon Fighting without the feats, being at Disadvantage for fighting with your primary hand and your offhand isn't much of a penalty. Yes, you are put into the position of having to use the lower attack roll whenever you make an attack with either hand. But depending on the AC of your opponent, you can still hit something even with Disadvantage.No, I don't think it should. There is no reason to penalize two-weapon fighting to that degree.
Okay. When I made my initial comment, I was focusing only on how Two-Weapon Fighting worked in 5e. Compared to 3e, Two-Weapon Fighting in 5e is a lot easier. It doesn't require feats to use.Right, hence the whole "5e isn't a nerf" part. Because WITHOUT taking multiple feats, everyone can do it far easier. I don't particularly see "we could do it with large penalties that we could then spend resources getting rid of" as a superior version.

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.