D&D 5E Improving Two-Weapon Fighting

[Xeviat]

I tend to run long days that hit the daily adjusted xp goals, so my DM style doesn't reward novaing. I wasn't thinking about the added nova potential, though separately I was thinking about limiting smites to once per round or making them cost a bonus action as is; people can't generally spend more than 1 spell slot a round (aside from reactions) anyway, so why is smite different?

If I'm removing the ability score to damage on the off-hand with the style, changing the style to allowing non-light weapons, the style ends up being a +2 damage bonus, just like duelist (duelist does less damage because it's also a +2 AC bonus).

Hunter's Mark and Hex could be a big deal with extra attack giving a 5th/6th level character 4 chances to land it (instead of 3), plus an easier time setting it up in the first round of combat. An 11th level fighter with 6 attacks could be compelled to multiclass to get Hunter's Mark or Hex too.

With it costing a bonus action, I'd want it to be "better" than GWFing's damage output, since that doesn't cost a bonus action (I really wish all of the fighting styles cost a bonus action; that would have been really good design). But since the Fighter can't Second Wind or Action Surge with Two-Weapon Fighting, it really feels like a style that is underserved for them.

I just ran the numbers on the Barbarian, by the book. Aside from interactions with subclasses (berserker favors GWFing, Zealot would favor TWFing a bit), Greatsword and dual shortswords are balanced when not raging from 1st through 4th, and while raging from 5th level on. Since rage costs a bonus action, TWFing falls behind in the initial round, until 20th level when you can just always be raging. That's a fun find. So the barbarian is balanced at 20th level by core, and while raging from 5th level on, but they can't always rage until later.

We know the fighter is out of balance. From 1st through 3rd, TWFing has higher damage, where GWFing is 11.33, TWFing is 13!. At 4th, it gets worse, 12.33 vs 15. At 5th-7th, GWFing is 24.66, while TWFing is 22.5, a big drop in its gain over GWFing. At 8th-10th, it kind of evens out, 26.66 vs 25.5, but at 11th it falls apart; GWFing is 40 while TWFing is 34! But this is without factoring in Second Wind not working at the same round as TWFing, or Action Surge not granting off-hand attacks.

Ultimately, I'd love to see something like Gama World, where TWFing against a single target would just be 2W+Stat. TWFing would have the added benefit of being able to split attacks, doing 1W+Stat against 2 targets. But something doesn't feel right about that. People often like attacks to mean individual discrete attack attempts.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'd love to see something like Gama World, where TWFing against a single target would just be 2W+Stat. TWFing would have the added benefit of being able to split attacks, doing 1W+Stat against 2 targets. But something doesn't feel right about that. People often like attacks to mean individual discrete attack attempts.

The second option, there /are/ two attack rolls. So that seems awfully close.

But, for decades, TWF has been the hard-to-pull-off, sometimes-nerfed, notoriously-OP fighting style, its just familiar when problematic, and unacceptably unfamiliar when not.

 

[Charlaquin]

The easily solution I've found is to add a weapon trait to several 1d4 damage weapons: "Offhand - you can use this weapon with any other one handed weapon to perform the two weapon fighting bonus action." With 1d8 (main hand) and 1d4 (off hand), the drop off is much less with multiple attacks, and the damage curve flattens out more. It would still be a slight issue at levels 11+, but not enough to worry about IMO (you still have more flexibility).

This is the best solution, in my opinion.

 

[5ekyu]

I think, "nah." Offer me a sword that does +10 damage once per day vs one that does +1 damage 10 times per day, and I'll take the the +1 version.

But thats not the options. The goals seem to be to get the twf pally on PAR dsmage eise from DPR plus also leaving the smite.

So seems more like kinda looking to get the +1 ten times and also have the +10 option.

That's why isolating DPR and comparing between classes, balancing that and dismissing the smite riffs is such faulty logic.

 

[Fenris-77]

If you just don't make the TW attack cost a bonus action you get pretty close if you don't get ability mods on rhe second hit (but can maybe add that via feat or ability). I'd probably leave it as a second roll to hit just to calm down the nova for shizz like the assassin. I'm a big fan of the image of TWF but I don't want to reinvent the wheel to make it work either.

 

[TwoSix]

Last time I checked, even with these changes you still can't use GWM or SS with two-weapon fighting, so the balance concerns are pretty moot.

I mean, you can already do one extra attack with two-weapon fighting, and that doesn't break anything. For pretty much every class (everyone other than 11+ fighters), this suggested rule would give you one more extra attack over the current rule, and free up a bonus action. It probably pushes two-weapon fighting to be the best option for classes with large per-attack damage bonuses, like rangers, warlocks, and maybe barbarians. Even with 3 or 4 attacks, fighters are still going to favor great weapons and archery.

My only concern is that the suggested rule would interact weirdly with martial arts for monks, so that might need to be looked at.

 

[FrogReaver]

Treat the twf attack as an extra attack in the attack action.

 

[TwoSix]

General rule change: You gain one extra off-hand attack with no stat modifier for every main hand attack during the attack option.

Fighting Style change: When you are wielding a melee weapon in each hand, your off-hand attacks do +1 damage, and you gain +1 AC.

Dual wielder feat: No change.

 

[Laurefindel]

General rule change: You gain one extra off-hand attack with no stat modifier for every main hand attack during the attack option.

Fighting Style change: When you are wielding a melee weapon in each hand, your off-hand attacks do +1 damage, and you gain +1 AC.

Dual wielder feat: No change.

I understand this doesn’t factor in the maths whatsoever, but rolling one die for damage without bonuses feels... unsatisfying. Especially at high level. So yes, the high-level fighter would make 4 off-hand attacks, but they would all feel rather weak. It’s only a perception issue, but somehow i can’t get over it.

 

[TwoSix]

I understand this doesn’t factor in the maths whatsoever, but rolling one die for damage without bonuses feels... unsatisfying. Especially at high level. So yes, the high-level fighter would make 4 off-hand attacks, but they would all feel rather weak. It’s only a perception issue, but somehow i can’t get over it.

Cast hex or hunter's mark, you'll feel better.