D&D 5E Hit and Run and Dual Wield

[Uller]

So...Hit and Run allows you to move up to half your speed as part of an attack action. Dual Wield allows you to make two attacks as part of your attack action and halve the damage.

So the thief is hidden to two enemy creatures but there is 10 feet between them. Can the thief move 5', attack then move 10' and attack again?

This is how we played it tonight...seemed to work okay.

 

[slobo777]

I haven't seen any generic rules for multi-attack to compare this to.

However, I think it "feels right" to allow the dual-wielder to split their attack in this way.

Balance-wise it gives something extra for dual-wielding, and the option isn't particularly powerful, so could do with some nice extras.

I also think it fits with 5E's simplified mechanics. If you can already move/attack/move, and you have two attacks, why not move/attack/move/attack/move . . .

I really hope 3E's "full attack" rule has gone for good!

 

[Uller]

That's how we saw it. It felt right. This was the second time we played 5e as a full session. The first time we did TotM style. This time it was with a battle mat and minis. We have three characters: elf archer, dwarf cleric of war and a human thief. All 5th level (last time we played 1st and 3rd so we wanted to see how 5th worked).

The first fight was with 5 orcs who ambushed the party as they were getting ready to enter a cave (they had tracked the orcs ther but the orcs doubled back on them when one made a really good spot check)

The thief moved into some brush and hid. 4 of the orcs attcked the elf and dwarf and one moved to try to find the thief and failed to see her. So he was 5' away and 10' form the next closest orc. My reasoning was if this had been TotM we'd have no way of knowing exact positions and the thief would have gotten her two attacks. So this just felt right. We never felt like she was dominating since dual wield damage was low enough that she rarely did a ton of damage with that second attack.