Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="StreamOfTheSky" data-source="post: 5612240" data-attributes="member: 35909">I think extra attacks are useful. *shrug*It does not fail compared to sword and board.  The only thing worse than sword and board is "single hand only" style.Sounds good.I think this is too good.  TWF is already giving massive penalty reducers and the ability to draw two weapons in the time it normally takes to draw one.  I don't think needing two more feats over the next 10-15 levels (depending on your BAB) is so awful.  What I did in my houserules was that ITWF and GTWF, in addition to the extra attack, also reduced the TWF penalty by 1, so with both and a light off-hand weapon, you eventually had no penalty.  Further, I made Two Weapon Defense into a single feat that auto scaled with the number of off-hand attacks you got.That's fine, I did the same.Why did you need to nerf this?  Just let 'em do it!One last thing that might help...I've long debated with myself and friends about changing Haste to grant an extra move action rather than an extra attack.  First of all, then it would actually be the mirror opposite of Slow (reducing you to a move or standard each round is effectively the same as depriving you of a move action).  Second of all, it would be a huge help to classes that rely on full attacking with a lot of weak attacks, like TWF and Monks, who often need help getting to full attack in melee.  And normal Haste is more beneficial to 2H weapon users, since they do more damage per attack, a flat +1 attack is better for them.  It would also help Scouts out a lot, which I don't have a problem with.  And since no spells really use Move action to cast, it'd still not be abusable by casters.</blockquote>

Verification