D&D 5E Adding a line to Dual Wielder feat...

[Yardiff]

Would adding "When you engage in two-weapon fighting, you can add your ability modifier to the damage of the second attack." to Dual Wielder make the feat OP?

 

[Plutancatty]

It would basically be giving any dual-wielder with a fighting style +1 AC, since it would make the TWF fighting style redundant. Also, this way a champion dual wielder could have the equivalent of 3 fighting styles, so I would skip the change.

 

[Mercule]

Yup. As [MENTION=6855956]Plutancatty[/MENTION] said, you're giving a twofer.

I've considered swapping what the feat and the fighting style do, though. Ultimately, I decided it isn't really worth it because the most likely characters to care are going to be those who already have ready access to both.

 

[Barolo]

Would adding "When you engage in two-weapon fighting, you can add your ability modifier to the damage of the second attack." to Dual Wielder make the feat OP?

You did notice you would be making the fighting style redundant, right?

 

[WarpedAcorn]

Would adding "When you engage in two-weapon fighting, you can add your ability modifier to the damage of the second attack." to Dual Wielder make the feat OP?

To answer your question, no I don't think it would make the Feat OP. But as previously stated, it does mimic the Dual Wield Fighting Style.

What I would *like* to see if the Dual Wielder Feat adding an extra off-hand attack if/when the player gets the ability "Extra Attack".

 

[Yardiff]

I see what your all saying. I was just trying to figure a way to let the rogue duel wield and add damage to secondary attack without having to multi-class.

 

[MostlyDm]

I see what your all saying. I was just trying to figure a way to let the rogue duel wield and add damage to secondary attack without having to multi-class.

That's kind of you, but why is it necessary?

Rogue damage is primarily delivered via sneak attack anyway. The loss is trivial.

 

[Satyrn]

I see what your all saying. I was just trying to figure a way to let the rogue duel wield and add damage to secondary attack without having to multi-class.

Let me say, then, that your rogue would be fine dual wielding without this feat or that fighting style, and I actually think that he's better off not bothering with either.

He's got plenty of other options to use his bonus action on, so if he hits with his first attack (and uses his sneak attack) he's better off using his cunning action. It's when he misses his first attack that the dual wielding becomes useful as a second chance for a sneak attack.

The extra damage from the fighting style just don't seem significant enough to matter. The nice bit about Dual Wielder feat though is getting to use rapiers instead of shortswords, but that hasn't made me select it yet for my dual wielding character. I'm just not concerned about squeezing out a little bit more damage. I'd prefer some unique benefits -

Oh, maybe let the Dual Wielder feat let the character make 2 opportunity attacks in a round, one with each weapon?

Or a second reaction that is specifically an opportunity attack with the offhand weapon. That would be cool.

 

[Clancey]

I would agree with most everything others have said except in the case of the Swashbuckler. I would like to see the off-hand attack adding the damage bonus because, really, that particular archetype is made for dual wielding and it should be built into that subclass. However, taking two levels of fighter isn't a bad way to really spice up that character. Dual wielding isn't that much of a boost to fighter-types, since once they get two attacks the one bonus attack doesn't help them all that much. Other fighting styles and feats are much more effective throughout every level for them. I am enjoying playing my Tabaxi 3rd level Swashbuckler/1st level fighter though. It is very tempting to go for that Action Surge...

 

[FrogReaver]

I'd allow the rogue to give up expertise or 1d6 sneak attack damage for the benefit of a fighting style.

 

[FrogReaver]

Also wanted to add. you may consider giving the drawing 2 weapons at same time and sheathing them part of the feat to the rogue for free. I personally think it's garbage taking a feat just to dual wield how I should already be able to.

No bonus damage but it may free his character if feeling the feat is required and allow him to take something more interesting.

 

[FrogReaver]

Your idea won't break the game though. It will be very strong at lower levels. Once level 10 is there it will barely be noticeable.

 

[FrogReaver]

So basiacally make sure you understand why he is taking the feat. Is it something he wants or feels he needs for flavor?

 

[LapBandit]

Dual wielding really starts to suffer at 5th level. The feat shores it up but it does nothing to increase the power or decrease the cost of doing it.

At my table:
You can draw two Light weapons as part of your movement.
Two Weapon Fighting Style allows you to add your ability modifier to your off-hand AND allows you to wield non-Light weapons.
Dual Wielder Feat allows you make your off-hand attack part of your Attack action and when you hit with an Opportunity Attack you can roll the damage of both weapons.

 

[WarpedAcorn]

Dual wielding really starts to suffer at 5th level. The feat shores it up but it does nothing to increase the power or decrease the cost of doing it.

At my table:
You can draw two Light weapons as part of your movement.
Two Weapon Fighting Style allows you to add your ability modifier to your off-hand AND allows you to wield non-Light weapons.
Dual Wielder Feat allows you make your off-hand attack part of your Attack action and when you hit with an Opportunity Attack you can roll the damage of both weapons.

I like this interpretation. I might steal it. =)

 

[Werebat]

Would adding "When you engage in two-weapon fighting, you can add your ability modifier to the damage of the second attack." to Dual Wielder make the feat OP?

Only if you're a DM. If you're a player, it's obviously balanced.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I'm also a proponent of "feature exchanges" rather than level-dip multiclassing.

If a player wants a single class feature from a different class... I'm always happy to swap out one of their regular class features they would have gotten for it instead. I find that much more elegant than making them multiclass and get a whole heap of features from the other class they might not have wanted, all to just get that single class feature.

So as [MENTION=6795602]FrogReaver[/MENTION] said above... swapping out 1d6 of Sneak Attack or Expertise or some other Rogue feature to get the Two-Weapon Fighting Style instead is my own personal feeling as the best way to go.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I see what your all saying. I was just trying to figure a way to let the rogue duel wield and add damage to secondary attack without having to multi-class.

He's better off taking the Mobile feat instead and just dual-wielding shortswords without the Dual Wielder feat.

 

[Yardiff]

He's better off taking the Mobile feat instead and just dual-wielding shortswords without the Dual Wielder feat.

Mobile feat is nice and I was going to take it as well.

My opinion is two-weapon fighting is pretty poor in 5e for any class but fighter or ranger and not all that great for those classes.

Still I'll stick with it for a few and maybe take 5 lv of EK and the rest AT.

 

[Clancey]

Dual wielding really starts to suffer at 5th level. The feat shores it up but it does nothing to increase the power or decrease the cost of doing it.

At my table:

Dual Wielder Feat allows you make your off-hand attack part of your Attack action and when you hit with an Opportunity Attack you can roll the damage of both weapons.

Just a little confused on this last bit - are you saying you allow 2 attacks on opportunity attacks?