D&D 5E How broken would it be to let people always spend a bonus action to make an off-hand attack, even if they didn't use an Attack action with a primary?

[NotAYakk]

The rogue does a bonus action attack, then readies an action to attack off turn.

The character casts booming blade, then does a bonus action offhand attack.

Fireball, stab.

Use a magic item, stab.

Lay on.hands, stab.

Stab, dodge.

Stab, disengage.

 

[RangerWickett]

Okay, so nix that.

If I were designing a combat system from the ground up, 6 action points is too much cognitive load. There's only so much complexity a human brain can track at once, and I don't think that sort of action point scheme is the best place to use your neural RAM.

I even think PF2's 'three action' system is not as well designed as it could be. It lets you do too many things, and so in order to balance your options it has to levy all sorts of fiddly restrictions or caveats. You often aren't allowed to be good at things, because if you are able to do them too often it breaks the game.

I think 5e is close. I'd like to have two actions, plus free movement. (This is similar to 5e's action/bonus action.) However, you could never use more than one action to attack. The second action can only be used to modulate the conditions of the battle. Shove, trip, grab, disarm. Or defend an ally. Or treat a wound. Or throw a tanglefoot bag or smokestick. Or cast a non-damaging illusion. Or hide.

My favorite idea is attacks that require set-up on a prior turn. On turn 1 you use one action to attack for damage, then use the next to, say, bind your opponent's sword. Then on turn 2, you might have an attack that says that if your opponent started the turn with their sword bound, you can make them stab one of their allies, then attack the original enemy to as you release the bind.

The idea is to have a rhythm of threat-and-response, where you're posing dilemmas and giving the other side a chance to respond. The reason save or suck spells are no fun is because they have no counterplay. But if there was a spell that charms someone, and then once they're charmed you can cast sleep to take them down, the enemy has a window to respond. Maybe they flee to try to get out of range of your spell. Maybe they attack and hope to kill you. Maybe they disarm themselves so they're not as much of a threat to their team. Maybe they use some spell of their own to defend their mind.

 

[Blue]

Looking at in the general, it looks fine.

Looking at if it can be abused, then it's no good.

There are a lot of reasons an extra attack without the restrictions is a big deal. Here's a couple of common ones:

• Increase ability to deliver once-a-turn damage like Sneak Attack.
  Increased per-hit non-ability damage, such as hex, hunter's mark, barbarian rage, etc. A barb without a bonus action could just attack again with their 2H weapon.
• Since it can be made with the same weapon, can be done with a single magical weapon for bonuses to hit/damage. This gets especially powerful if you have a weapon like a flame blade that does lots of additional damage.
• GWM or SS -5/+10 still seem to work just fine. Even better to use because you're not risking much if you miss, just 1 damage.
• Paladins can nova quicker (more chances to land a hit and divine smite).
• Adds an extra attack while holding a shield. Really nice for clerics who cast and yet can hit (perhaps with a subclass 1/round damage bonus). Really nice for sword and board fighters with dueling style for +2 more damage plus whatever special their subclass brings them, like battlemaster's ability to disarm/frighten on a hit with a superiority die.

I think keeping offhand to two light weapons in both hands is an important restriction. It's still a nice bonus - works after casting a spell, including attack cantrips. You can poison a weapon and then stab with it. You can stab then disengage or dodge.

 

[Weiley31]

Wait: You can't use a Bonus Action to just do a regular attack? I know abilities that say its a Bonus Action can be Bonus Actioned, I mean just like a regular attack that isn't Raging or whatever. This came up in last the last session, and as a Barbarian, I almost got denied my Rage, causing it to end early, by choosing to Dodge and then planning on using a Bonus action to make an Attack. The DM was this close to making the realization of my Rage turning off, due to not getting hit or doing damage to the Skeleton, UNTIL I pointed out that during two previous rounds of combat, two other Barbarian characters made an attack via Bonus Action. The DM had to rule in my favor because of that.

In my defense though, I only started do the Bonus Action to do an additional attack because I saw two other players do it, thus thinking it was actually an option I could do with a Bonus Action.

 

[ReshiIRE]

You definitely can't use a Bonus Action to do a regular attack unless you have a feature or some ability or weapon that allows you to do that.

I can't even name a class (or subclass?) ability that allows you to do that, nor a feat.

 

[BluejayJunior]

Wait: You can't use a Bonus Action to just do a regular attack? I know abilities that say its a Bonus Action can be Bonus Actioned, I mean just like a regular attack that isn't Raging or whatever. This came up in last the last session, and as a Barbarian, I almost got denied my Rage, causing it to end early, by choosing to Dodge and then planning on using a Bonus action to make an Attack. The DM was this close to making the realization of my Rage turning off, due to not getting hit or doing damage to the Skeleton, UNTIL I pointed out that during two previous rounds of combat, two other Barbarian characters made an attack via Bonus Action. The DM had to rule in my favor because of that.

In my defense though, I only started do the Bonus Action to do an additional attack because I saw two other players do it, thus thinking it was actually an option I could do with a Bonus Action.

No. You absolutely can't do that. You can't just make an attack with a bonus action.
Frenzy barbarians can make an additional bonus action attack if they use the attack action. That is part of their level 3 class trait. That may have been what they were doing. But they still need to attack with an action first.

 

[Weiley31]

Frenzy barbarians can make an additional bonus action attack if they use the attack action. That is part of their level 3 class trait. That may have been what they were doing. But they still need to attack with an action first.

Both of said Barbarians in the last session, including me, are Primal Path of the Ancestral Guardian Barbarians.

 

[billd91]

Wait: You can't use a Bonus Action to just do a regular attack? I know abilities that say its a Bonus Action can be Bonus Actioned, I mean just like a regular attack that isn't Raging or whatever. This came up in last the last session, and as a Barbarian, I almost got denied my Rage, causing it to end early, by choosing to Dodge and then planning on using a Bonus action to make an Attack. The DM was this close to making the realization of my Rage turning off, due to not getting hit or doing damage to the Skeleton, UNTIL I pointed out that during two previous rounds of combat, two other Barbarian characters made an attack via Bonus Action. The DM had to rule in my favor because of that.

In my defense though, I only started do the Bonus Action to do an additional attack because I saw two other players do it, thus thinking it was actually an option I could do with a Bonus Action.

What else had those barbarian characters done in their round when they took the attacks as bonus actions? Because you can make an attack as a bonus action with an off-hand weapon, but that's only if you were also taking the Attack action with your action. Taking the Dodge action would precluding being able to do that.
If the other barbarians weren't fighting with off-hand weapons, then it's entirely possible the DM misinterpreted some rule somewhere.

 

[Weiley31]

What else had those barbarian characters done in their round when they took the attacks as bonus actions? Because you can make an attack as a bonus action with an off-hand weapon, but that's only if you were also taking the Attack action with your action. Taking the Dodge action would precluding being able to do that.
If the other barbarians weren't fighting with off-hand weapons, then it's entirely possible the DM misinterpreted some rule somewhere.

I think we all might have misinterpreted the rules.

 

[ECMO3]

The genesis of this question is that I'm looking to come up with a few default bonus actions anyone can use.

Normally if you fight with a light melee weapon in your main hand and spend your action to Attack, you can then spend a bonus action to get one more attack with a different light off-hand weapon, though you don't get to add your ability modifier to the damage (unless it's negative).

A typical light weapon does d6 damage (average 3.5), while a typical non-light one-handed weapon does d8 damage (average 4.5).

So I suppose the game is saying that if you're willing to sacrifice 1 point of damage per attack with your primary weapon (d6 instead of d8), then getting one extra bonus action attack that probably 3 damage is also balanced. That's a net of 2 damage.

(I know there's all sorts of other reasons you want extra attacks, like if you want more chances to land sneak attack, or if you spend feats or have fighting styles to improve it. But for a normal adventurer, an off hand attack as a bonus action nets an average of 2 damage.)

Anyway, if Attack is an action, and casting a spell is an action, would it be balanced to let a wizard cast a spell, then make an attack with a dagger as a bonus action (doing an average of 2 damage)? Or what if a character Dashes as an action? Would a bonus action attack with a club be fair then?

Heck, since anyone could have a free hand and just punch (doing 1 damage), is there a reason there isn't just a default option like:

Light Attack
Spend a bonus action to make an attack. If the attack hits, instead of rolling for damage and adding bonuses from ability modifiers, you just deal 1 damage if you are unarmed or only have one weapon, perhaps by delivering a pommel strike or a tiny slice. However, if you make this bonus action attack with a weapon that you aren't using for other attacks this turn, it does 2 damage instead.

I am not really a fan. The cool thing about bonus actions is you have to build a character that has those options. It is special, making a bonus action available to every character every turn would make those things less special IMO.

Also this will slow down combat as every character and every monster that uses a weapon would do it every turn if they did not have another BA option.

In terms of balance there are six problems I see. Most are not gamebreaking but they will upset or substantially alter the game I think:

1. It changes the balance of monsters. Goblins would be nerfed (both the monster and the race) because every character could disengage, or hide as action and still attack. Also monsters with light weapons and low damage would logically never use the attack action. For example Kobold - attack for 4 damage or dodge and attack for 2. Quicklings could never be hit or targeted in melee; take disengage as an action and move 120 feet and make your light weapon attack without causing AOOs.

2. At low levels 2 points of damage is significant. For example Goblin Fury of the small is once a day and 1 point of damage at 1st level. This is not an issue at high levels.

3. Dodge action: This would allow attacking and taking the dodge action every single turn. Also running something like Hex, Hunters Mark, Smite and the host of Ranger and Fighter subclass damage bonuses will afford significant damage on this attack while dodging every turn. For example a 4th level swarmkeeper running Hunters Mark could use this to do 9 DPR while also dodging every turn. In terms of metagaming; you arm this character with a short sword, a whip and the sentinel feat and they have a 5' and 10' AOO for full damage while taking dodge and doing 9dpr every turn and the enemy can't escape to target someone else. This is assuming you don't allow a damage boost from the TWF fighting style, if you allow that it is even more OP.

4. Monks and two weapon martials: Monks and two weapon martials are already weak in terms of damage, but they rely on their bonus action for that damage just about every turn. By giving other classes the ability to add damage you are moving them further ahead of Monks and two-weapon guys. Considering #2 above, why would anyone ever play a monk? This is gamebreaking IMO, at least if you want to include Monks in your game.

5 Wizards: Wizards are generally considered the most powerful class and could boost damage just about every turn while casting the most powerful spells in the game. Again this makes the powerful more powerful.

6. Rogue: If you allow SA I think that would be op for a Rogue. Also with an AT you could cast an offensive spell and still land SA which makes the most powerful Rogue even more powerful. The thief would be significantly nerfed as any Rogue could both sneak attack and use an object or use theives tools. This would be gamebreaking as well I think. If you don't allow SA it would nerf cunning action, by essentially giving every class the ability to use these and more while still getting in an attack of sorts.