Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Dual Wielder, Two-weapon Fighting, Nick
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 9601859" data-attributes="member: 6799660"><p> <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">TWF will always be good for rogues trying to make sure at least one attack hits (so they get to inflict SA damage). Nick means they still can Cunning Action. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">TWF with nick is good for a Ranger using <em>Hunter's Mark</em>.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">TWF with nick <em><u>would</u></em> be good for Bladelocks using <em>Hex <u>if</u></em> the specifics of being a bladelock played ball with TWF (maybe it works for a dex>cha warlock, I will have to check).</li> </ul><p></p><p>TWF with nick <em><u>and Dual wielder</u></em>... there are precious few examples where this looks great. Something with extra damage per attack that doesn't require constant bonus actions (such as moving around your <em>hex </em>or <em>hunter's mark</em>). Amazingly this seems to be barbarians (rage damage) and paladins using <em>Divine Favor</em> (note: both missing the bonus action attack for the first round of combat). </p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The barbarian is not as tied to THF as 2014 Reckless Attack+GWM synergy used to make it seem, but without a fighting style or fighter's extra ASIs, going TWF is quite a commitment. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The Paladin still needs to spend their first round bonus action casting <em>Divine Favor</em>, and the extra attack is competing with smite spells for bonus action (may have uses in altered rest-rules campaigns)</li> </ul><p>Both of them are spending a feat, so if we compare at 5th level to a 2HF with GWM and 18 str for either and greatsword or shortsword/handaxe and scimitar:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The barbarian is doing 4d6+3x str+4x rage (34 avg) compared to 4d6+2x str+2x rage +2x PB +possible bonus action 2d6+str+rage+PB (32, plus possible 16). Not exactly optimal.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The paladin is doing 4d6+4x str +4d4 (40) compared to 4d6*+2x str+2x PB+2d4 +possible bonus action 2d6+str+PB+2d4, or spend L2 spell for extra 3d8** (33, plus possible 16.5, or else possible 13.5) <em><span style="font-size: 10px">*and +1 AC for defensive fighting style, as I won't inflict GWF on this poor sod (+2 with possible +1 dmg on bonus attack if you disagree). **or less damage but other effects.</span></em></li> </ul><p>Again, with first round of combat missing the bonus action to put up the spell or rage. So the paladin is the best option, and even then it needs a bunch of situational setups (long combats, needing to conserve spells, not a lot of bonus-action attacks coming from GWM) to outperform a more standard build. </p><p></p><p>I think if you are dead set on building a twf character, and don't have a lot of consistent use for your bonus action (so maybe that fighter you mention), then perhaps it's worth the feat since you're going to be twf-ing anyways. Otherwise a valor bard Conjure Minor Elemental build I suppose*. <span style="font-size: 10px"><em>*these seem to be 90% theory-craft anyways, might as well max out the concept</em></span></p><p></p><p>Otherwise, this feat seems to be like 2014's True Strike -- a reasonable ability designed for a slightly different game than the one we ended up with. If there were other bonus-action-less per-attack damage-adds (maybe this alt-D&D's <em>Hunter's Mark</em> could be moved as part of an attack action like drawing a weapon), or there was a power-attack feat similar to 2014 SS/GWM (that worked for light weapons), it would be a good feat.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Willie the Duck, post: 9601859, member: 6799660"] [LIST] [*]TWF will always be good for rogues trying to make sure at least one attack hits (so they get to inflict SA damage). Nick means they still can Cunning Action. [*]TWF with nick is good for a Ranger using [I]Hunter's Mark[/I]. [*]TWF with nick [I][U]would[/U][/I] be good for Bladelocks using [I]Hex [U]if[/U][/I] the specifics of being a bladelock played ball with TWF (maybe it works for a dex>cha warlock, I will have to check). [/LIST] TWF with nick [I][U]and Dual wielder[/U][/I]... there are precious few examples where this looks great. Something with extra damage per attack that doesn't require constant bonus actions (such as moving around your [I]hex [/I]or [I]hunter's mark[/I]). Amazingly this seems to be barbarians (rage damage) and paladins using [I]Divine Favor[/I] (note: both missing the bonus action attack for the first round of combat). [LIST] [*]The barbarian is not as tied to THF as 2014 Reckless Attack+GWM synergy used to make it seem, but without a fighting style or fighter's extra ASIs, going TWF is quite a commitment. [*]The Paladin still needs to spend their first round bonus action casting [I]Divine Favor[/I], and the extra attack is competing with smite spells for bonus action (may have uses in altered rest-rules campaigns) [/LIST] Both of them are spending a feat, so if we compare at 5th level to a 2HF with GWM and 18 str for either and greatsword or shortsword/handaxe and scimitar: [LIST] [*]The barbarian is doing 4d6+3x str+4x rage (34 avg) compared to 4d6+2x str+2x rage +2x PB +possible bonus action 2d6+str+rage+PB (32, plus possible 16). Not exactly optimal. [*]The paladin is doing 4d6+4x str +4d4 (40) compared to 4d6*+2x str+2x PB+2d4 +possible bonus action 2d6+str+PB+2d4, or spend L2 spell for extra 3d8** (33, plus possible 16.5, or else possible 13.5) [I][SIZE=2]*and +1 AC for defensive fighting style, as I won't inflict GWF on this poor sod (+2 with possible +1 dmg on bonus attack if you disagree). **or less damage but other effects.[/SIZE][/I] [/LIST] Again, with first round of combat missing the bonus action to put up the spell or rage. So the paladin is the best option, and even then it needs a bunch of situational setups (long combats, needing to conserve spells, not a lot of bonus-action attacks coming from GWM) to outperform a more standard build. I think if you are dead set on building a twf character, and don't have a lot of consistent use for your bonus action (so maybe that fighter you mention), then perhaps it's worth the feat since you're going to be twf-ing anyways. Otherwise a valor bard Conjure Minor Elemental build I suppose*. [SIZE=2][I]*these seem to be 90% theory-craft anyways, might as well max out the concept[/I][/SIZE] Otherwise, this feat seems to be like 2014's True Strike -- a reasonable ability designed for a slightly different game than the one we ended up with. If there were other bonus-action-less per-attack damage-adds (maybe this alt-D&D's [I]Hunter's Mark[/I] could be moved as part of an attack action like drawing a weapon), or there was a power-attack feat similar to 2014 SS/GWM (that worked for light weapons), it would be a good feat. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Dual Wielder, Two-weapon Fighting, Nick
Top