D&D 5E Balance Issues: Two-Weapon Fighting

[Syntallah]

Does anyone foresee any balance issues if a Fighter with the Two-Weapon Fighting Style is allowed to use a non-light-but-finessable weapon (e.g. rapier or whip) in their main hand while simultaneously wielding the standard light-only weapon in the off hand (e.g. dagger, etc)?

By RAW, the classic combination of rapier / main gauche is not allowed... And I got a player who wants to wield a shortsword and whip...

 

[Branduil]

Pretty sure there will be a feat which allows this.

 

[Xodis]

I think a feat is going to allow it, along with other bonuses.

 

[Stalker0]

Could be a benefit of 5th level since Twfs starts to lose out as more attacks are gained

 

[Branduil]

Could be a benefit of 5th level since Twfs starts to lose out as more attacks are gained

But for Rogues and Rangers, you have class abilities which incentivize the use of TWF, which is nice. For Rogues it's the only way to get more than one attack per round, increasing sneak attack odds.

 

[DEFCON 1]

For Rogues it's the only way to get more than one attack per round, increasing sneak attack odds.

Although that uses up the Rogue's Bonus Action, and thus Cunning Action gets unused. Now some folks might like the tactics of that... choosing each round whether to using Cunning Action or take a second attack... but it does render TWF slightly less of an obvious choice for the Rogue player.

 

[Crothian]

Does anyone foresee any balance issues if a Fighter with the Two-Weapon Fighting Style is allowed to use a non-light-but-finessable weapon (e.g. rapier or whip) in their main hand while simultaneously wielding the standard light-only weapon in the off hand (e.g. dagger, etc)?

It is really hard to say with the full game not being out yet. Give it a try and report back what your findings are.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Even if it doesn't show up in a rulebook, go with it if that's what the player wants and you as the DM don't see any issues with it. Your gaming fun is more important than any rule or lack of a rule.

 

[TwoSix]

Although that uses up the Rogue's Bonus Action, and thus Cunning Action gets unused. Now some folks might like the tactics of that... choosing each round whether to using Cunning Action or take a second attack... but it does render TWF slightly less of an obvious choice for the Rogue player.

If you hit with the first attack, go with Cunning Action. If you miss, go with the second attack.

Seems to me the only reason a rogue wouldn't dual wield is if he had somehow gained shield proficiency.

 

[Mistwell]

If you hit with the first attack, go with Cunning Action. If you miss, go with the second attack.

Seems to me the only reason a rogue wouldn't dual wield is if he had somehow gained shield proficiency.

Failing to use cunning action means either accepting an opportunity attack, or sitting there on the front line ready to accept the pounding from the guy you just failed to kill. The determining factor will be your hit points and your AC and who else is nearby, not whether or not you missed. Your DPR doesn't matter when you're dead.