D&D 5E Fighting with non-master hand

[Arcshot]

Quick question: A character is missing his right (master) hand after it was cut off during a combat. Now he can only hold his weapon in his left hand. What is the penalty for fighting with a weapon held in his non-master hand? Thanks.

 

[marcelvdpol]

Officially probably none. You could argue that the penalty should be the same as fighting with two weapons (ie you don't get the Ability modified on Damage rolls); this represents not being able to put the full force/accuracy to the blow as you are not used to fighting with your non-master hand.

As always, you and your DM should discuss this. It will take the character some time to learn to fight with his off-hand since it is now the only hand he has. However, I could imagine any penalty being only a temporary one as your character will improve (since he really needs to) the use of his off-hand until he is as good with that hand as he was with his main hand.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

Yeah there is no penalty to hit by RAW. Just damage but as said, a bit of time and he would compensate.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

As others have said, there is no penalty. You only lose your ability bonus to damage to an attack made with your bonus action using the two-weapon fighting rules. If you have two attacks and strike once with each hand for example, you get your ability bonus to damage for both hands.

Being able to fight with your off hand as opposed to coordinating both hands at once is generally different. It is assumed that characters are broadly competent with their off-hands.

Of course your DM is free to houserule a penalty in (maybe due to balance etc) for a while until your character adjusts. I wouldn't regard it as necessary. You still have the very real penalties of not being able to use a two-handed weapon or shield.

 

[Salamandyr]

Assuming he's a fighter type, he probably trained to be deadly with either hand as a matter of course.

 

[Rune]

It's also worth pointing out that, per the two-weapon-fighting rules, the attacker gets to choose which weapon is being used for a main-hand attack - and this choice can change between attacks. If you have extra attacks, you can alternate between wielded weapons and they all count as main-hand attacks, until you add in the bonus-action off-hand attack, which will use the opposite weapon as one of your main-hand attacks.

Essentially, all 5e characters are ambidextrous. As a DM, I would leave it at that. Losing a hand is punitive enough without adding extra penalties.

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

D&D 5E does not have any concept of "main hand".

As a ruling, I might give the character disadvantage for a few days, to represent getting used to the new hand and (more importantly) different balance because of a missing limb.

 

[Bupp]

I was thinking disadvantage, but I also like the suggestion of not using ability modifiers on damage.

This penalty can be overcome. Some new training and practice would be a great Downtime Activity.

Cue training montage montage!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOcsBiCaEJ8

 

[Sunseeker]

I wouldn't give any penalty, there's already a limitation: now he can't be a sword-and-board fighter, or qualify for any trick that requires you to wield two weapons, or wield any two-handed weapons.

The RAW doesn't even care which hand you make multiple attacks with. Two-weapon fighting only applies when you're wielding a weapon in BOTH hands, but even then it doesn't differentiate between which one you strike first or second with. Some classes make even less of a distinction: Monks can simply make "multiple attacks", using the same hand each time for each attack.

 

[Ancalagon]

I've never lost a hand (dear lord!) but from personal experience, fighting with your bad hand "feels" like a -2 penalty. Disadvantage is too drastic. I imagine with time this penalty would diminish and then go away.

I'll also note that depending on there the limb loss occurred, it may still be able to wield certain types of shields.