D&D (2024) Dual Wielding

[Bacon Bits]

A default assumption on the use of Nick is that it has to be on the weapon that you make the extra attack with. That is, if you attacked with a shortsword + scimitar, the scimitar would be the offhand weapon because that's what you're making the extra attack with, and thus would have to be the weapon with the Nick property in order to gain its benefit.

I don't think that assumption is actually supported by the text of Nick. I think it's left intentionally ambiguous. Every other mastery property explicitly states "this weapon". Nick does not. Indeed, it just backreferences the Light property.

It would have been really easy for Nick to read: "When you make the extra attack of the Light property with this weapon, you can make it as part of the Attack action instead of as a Bonus Action," or they could have said, "When you make the extra attack of the Light property and you have already attacked with this weapon, you can make [the extra attack of the Light property] as part of the Attack action instead of as a Bonus Action."

But they didn't do either of those things.

I think it's as wide open as "If you're using two Light weapons, and one of them has Nick, and you have mastery of that weapon, you can make the Light attack as a part of the Attack action intead of as a bonus action." I really think the rules just don't care if you attack with scimitar or shortsword first.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

The only weapon mastery that does not include "with this weapon" in its language is Nick.

Yeah, but it refers to 'the extra attack of the Light property'... which specifically points out that attack is made with another Light weapon.

Light​

When you take the Attack action on your turn and attack with a Light weapon, you can make one extra attack as a Bonus Action later on the same turn. That extra attack must be made with a different Light weapon

That doesn't extend to a non-Light weapon in any way, as Dualwielder's attack is not an extra attack of the Light property, it's (how did the TWF style put it...) 'an extra attack as a result of using a weapon that has the Light property'. It's just using that as its trigger.

Not that there's any harm in this reading, as it's such a minor benefit (would need to have Dualwielder and want to use your bonus action for something else, all just to gain a little bigger damage die), but rules-wise, your example doesn't work.

It does seem to work if you want to do Dagger -> Nick with Shortsword... which might make sense if you have different on-hit properties on each weapon (poison, flametongue, radiant vs undead, whatever).

 

[ECMO3]

Yeah, but it refers to 'the extra attack of the Light property'... which specifically points out that attack is made with another Light weapon.

Sure but let's take a 1st level fighter. I make 1 attack with a Dagger using my attack action, throwing it at a bad guy.

Since I attacked with a light weapon I qualify for the light weapon feature so I can attack another weapon with the light feature as a bonus action. Since the dagger has the nick property I can make the light attack as part of my attack action. I could use a hand axe or light hammer or a shortsword or anything that is light really to make the nick attack.

Or as another example at 5th level I could attack an enemy in melee with the dagger and kill him and then use nick to fling a hand axe across the battlefield at the guy attacking the Wizard and then pull out my warhammer and make a melee attack on a third guy with extra attack.

I could also do it in the reverse order obviously using the same weapons, which is I guess what the "default" method is, but the order can be important tactically particularly when you consider thrown light weapons.

EDIT: I am not saying that I think this should be the reading RAI, all I am saying is the order and which weapons qualify does often make a difference. Attack with a Shotsword and Nick with a dagger is not always the same as Attack with a Dagger and nick with a Shortsword due to the order involved.

 

[clearstream]

Sure but let's take a 1st level fighter. I make 1 attack with a Dagger using my attack action, throwing it at a bad guy.

Since I attacked with a light weapon I qualify for the light weapon feature so I can attack another weapon with the light feature as a bonus action. Since the dagger has the nick property I can make the light attack as part of my attack action. I could use a hand axe or light hammer or a shortsword or anything that is light really to make the nick attack.

Or as another example at 5th level I could attack an enemy in melee with the dagger and kill him and then use nick to fling a hand axe across the battlefield at the guy attacking the Wizard and then pull out my warhammer and make a melee attack on a third guy with extra attack.

I could also do it in the reverse order obviously using the same weapons, which is I guess what the "default" method is, but the order can be important tactically particularly when you consider thrown light weapons.

And thus is heralded the rise of the dagger-handaxe-shield wielder. Throw (dagger) > draw (part of attack) > throw (dagger) > draw (free interaction) > throw (handaxe), and I have a shield.

 

[Pauln6]

And thus is heralded the rise of the dagger-handaxe-shield wielder. Throw (dagger) > draw (part of attack) > throw (dagger) > draw (free interaction) > throw (handaxe), and I have a shield.

Yeah, if their intention is to make fighting with light weapons a viable option for Fighters and Barbarians, whether by wielding two weapons at once or not, then maybe that is the intent, but I doubt it.

I really like that nick plugs a TWF gap but can anyone tell me what reason a rogue would have NOT to use two light weapons in this edition? I'd like to think you could build varied character tropes without feeling penalised.

I guess you could keep fast hands as an option but that option remains if you throw or drop your second weapon.

Using a shortbow or crossbow for range, but you would just swap styles when you get close.

More and more I think I am going to prefer whittling down masteries just to fighters and rangers as the only two classes that I felt were lacking some combat oomph in 5e 2014.

 

[clearstream]

Yeah, if their intention is to make fighting with light weapons a viable option for Fighters and Barbarians, whether by wielding two weapons at once or not, then maybe that is the intent, but I doubt it.

I really like that nick plugs a TWF gap but can anyone tell me what reason a rogue would have NOT to use two light weapons in this edition? I'd like to think you could build varied character tropes without feeling penalised.

Mainly shortbow. But is two light worse than always-rapier?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Mainly shortbow. But is two light worse than always-rapier?

Always rapier has the advantage of always chaining vex with a slightly higher damage die.

If you use nick, one attack was made without advantage.

 

[Pauln6]

Always rapier has the advantage of always chaining vex with a slightly higher damage die.

If you use nick, one attack was made without advantage.

Yeah in 1e it would normally have been a longsword and shortbow as the highest damage dealing weapons, so it's interesting to see that there are now tangible benefits if you take various different
weapons under this system. I suppose, with aiming and nick, thrown daggers also have a bit of a niche too.

Sling is still lame - its only advantage being that it's one-handed.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

I really like that nick plugs a TWF gap but can anyone tell me what reason a rogue would have NOT to use two light weapons in this edition?

A lot of people seem just as enamored by attack cantrips as they were in 2014. That's a single big hit.

Besides that, unfortunately dual hand crossbows are still a thing, but they only have a 30ft range (unless you pick up Sharpshooter just for that), so a real bow of some sort gives you more range without feat expenditure.

 

[Pauln6]

A lot of people seem just as enamored by attack cantrips as they were in 2014. That's a single big hit.

Besides that, unfortunately dual hand crossbows are still a thing, but they only have a 30ft range (unless you pick up Sharpshooter just for that), so a real bow of some sort gives you more range without feat expenditure.

Ah yeah that's a relief for my rogue/shadow sorcerer/warlock. She was using rapier and greenflame blade with sneak attack. She's only a L3 rogue so her combined damage was still a bit bleh. The issue comes when a single-classed rogue takes magic adept but I guess it's not enough of an issue to crack down on now that eldritch blast is off the table.