D&D 5E Improving Two-Weapon Fighting

[Xeviat]

Two-Weapon Fighting has long been my favorite fighting style in D&D. I read "Legacy" at too young of an age. I lamented when Baldur's Gate didn't let me use TWFing and cheered when BG2 added it in. I watched with sadness when I started running 3E and the TWFing ranger in the group was constantly out damaged by the party Barbarian. I cut my teeth on D&D damage statistics in an effort to rebalance TWFing in 3E, and had my own house rules that produced a few fun TWFing characters (I got to see it in action on a Barbarian, Fighter, and that original Ranger at higher levels).

4E baked TWFing into class powers, but it worked (the feat was terrible, though).

And then we get to 5E. At low levels, the Fighter performs well with TWFing, but it falls to the wayside at 5th level and just goes downhill after that. The Rogue does very well with it, gaining an extra shot at landing a sneak attack; the Rogue also has a really interesting trade-off between using a bonus action for an extra attack or using it for Cunning Action. The Ranger can get some mileage out of it if they're careful with their use of Hunter's Mark, but this is a lot harder to test for. Barbarians ... they don't do well with it.

The fact that the style is weak on Barbarians and Fighters upsets me. I wish it was decent. I wish it was on par with using a Two-Handed Weapon, possibly a little weaker because of it's ability to split damage. But using spells as a guideline, attacking 2 creatures instead of 1 should be about a 2/3rds reduction in damage, not a 1/2 reduction in damage, so I'm not sure splitting damage is as big of a deal as people treat it.

So, I've set out to "fix" TWFing. I think my changes put it in a good place for the Fighter but it will probably require some changes to things like Hunter's Mark.

First, I'd like to point out that a greatsword's 2d6+Str is equal to two shortsword's 1d6+Stat +1d6+0, no matter how many extra attacks the character gets. And, a fighter with GWFing's 2d6*+Str (8.33+stat) is reasonably close to two longsword's 1d8+Stat +1d8 (9+stat), and the +2 damage bonus there is equal to Duelist's damage bonus.

What I suggest is have TWFing not require a bonus action AND have it give off-hand attacks equal to main hand attacks, but the style wouldn't grant stat bonus to off-hand damage. The style would instead allow the wielding of non-light weapons (and the feat would need to be changed). This would allow it to improve with Extra Attack, and it would work with a Fighter's Action surge. The ability to wield two magic weapons to stack a little extra damage may be moot since the GWFer could just as easily be using gauntlets of ogre power or a belt of giant strength to up their damage too.

I think this is balanced for the Fighter, but what would it do to the rest of the classes? Would I find all Rogues using TWFing and never see a single rapier wielder (I've thought to buff sneak attack dice to match weapon damage dice, so a rapier wielder would deal more damage while the twfer has higher chance of landing sneak attack)? Would it push the Ranger's damage too high to get an extra hit of Hunter's Mark at 5th level and higher (and make it easier for them to cast Hunter's Mark and other spells in the middle of combat)?

What would break if I took away TWFing's bonus action requirement and changed the TWFing Fighting Style to "You can make off-hand attacks even if both weapons are not light" (rather than it adding stat bonus to damage)?

An addition after doing some new math:

After testing the Ranger with and without hunter's mark, with and without the bonus action, and with my initial TWFing suggestion, my rules flatten out the damage difference between Duelist and TWFing. On a single classed fighter, this would be even across the board (barring weird interactions with subclasses, but I'm not seeing them).

My rules would make TWFing the optimal choice while a barbarian is raging (which means all the time at higher levels). The monk's martial arts would need to be rewritten. I'd also need to decide what I want to happen to the Rogue. I could partially avoid some of that by making the removal of the bonus action part of the style as well, but these classes could pick that up with a 1 level fighter dip (not sure that would be the best for all of them, though).

Thoughts?

 

[Zardnaar]

Easiest might be to make it an action. A TWF using hex or hunters mark starts looking better.

Feat support as well, -5/+10 warps things but maybe an extra attack if both attacks connect.

I allowed some 3pp feats as well that let you stack strength and Dex to damage so it aids twf a lot.

 

[jaelis]

I changed it to: you can attack with both weapons simultaneously, as one attack with combined damage. But if you choose to attack with only one weapon, you can later attack with the other as a bonus action. So with two short swords and extra attack, you could attack twice for 2d6 + stat, or three times at 2d6+stat, 1d6+stat, 1d6 (no stat). That balances the damage, keeps some flexibility, and doesn’t bog down the game.

Style lets you use non-light weapons. Feat adds half stat to offhand damage, plus use both weapons for opportunity attacks.

I’ve been happy with it.

 

[Quartz]

First, I'd like to point out that a greatsword's 2d6+Str is equal to two shortsword's 1d6+Stat +1d6+0,

So far so good.

no matter how many extra attacks the character gets. And, a fighter with GWFing's 2d6*+Str (8.33+stat) is reasonably close to two longsword's 1d8+Stat +1d8 (9+stat),

No, it's nearly a full point worse.

and the +2 damage bonus there is equal to Duelist's damage bonus.

No, you're getting a +3.5 damage bonus so the Duellist's +2 is 1.5 points worse (for a d6 weapon).

What I suggest is have TWFing not require a bonus action AND have it give off-hand attacks equal to main hand attacks... The style would instead allow the wielding of non-light weapons (and the feat would need to be changed).

Since the greatest difference is with Duellist, let's look at a putative 11th level fighter. The Duellist rolls 3x (1d8 + stat +2) whereas the TWF rolls 3x (1d8 + stat + 1d6) for a difference of 4.5 damage. And then there's the fact that the TWF fighter is getting six attacks, each with the potential for some secondary effect whereas the Duellist gets only three. And if the TWF gets a Bonus Action, is she getting one attack or two?

As written in the PHB, TWF is strictly better than Duellist for anyone with a damage stat of 14+ until 11th level anyway. Assume a 16 stat. A first level duellist does 1d8+2+3 (average 9.5); a first level TWF does 2d6 + 2x 3 (average 13). That's a huge difference, BTW. A 5th level Duellist does 2d8 + 2x 3 + 2x 2 (average 19); a 5th level TWF does 3d6 + 3x 3 (average 19.5). An 11th level Duellist does 3d8 + 3x 3 + 3x 2 (average 28.5); an 11th level TWF does 4d6 + 4x 3 (average 26). And how many campaigns get to 11th level?

Let me address the other big issue: the use of the Bonus Action. Just as Duellist trades lower damage for greater security (because she can use a shield and get +2 AC), so TWF trades the Bonus Action for increased regular damage. The TWF user always get to use her BA; other fighting styles do not.

So that's a solid no from me. TWF does not need improvement.

 

[5ekyu]

To me, the trade-offs between fighting with two light weapons and one big weapon have been giving up some damage overall but gaining an extra attack roll, often throw able weapons, often simple weapons, more concealable weapons and dex-based weapons (reducing you to SAD).

Each of these matters (some more circumstantially than see in white rooms or spreadsheets) but it boils down to at it's most basic in my experience the question of are you relying on the weapon type for damage or is the main damage going to come from something else added to an attack - smite, sneak, etc.

I think it's not accidental that the perception of twf being sub-par stems often when looking at the one class (fighter) that stacks more and more attacks beyond that of say pally and ranger and barb and rogue etc.

So, rather than changing TWF across the board to fix what is perceived as a weakness (if we ignore those other things) for its use with high level fighters, fix the higher level fighters.

Change extra attack-3 and extra attack 4 to include an extra attack from twf's bonus action.

Basically, dont use a described problem that stems from the combo of TWF and the fighter class at high level to buff the rogue, pally etc.

 

[jaelis]

So that's a solid no from me. TWF does not need improvement.

Level 11+ fighter?

 

[Ristamar]

My only "fix" is adding a single benefit to the Dual Wielder feat (inspired by Elven Accuracy):

• Whenever you have advantage on a melee weapon attack roll while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand, you can reroll one of the dice once.

 

[S'mon]

A 2 hand axe wielding barbarian applies Rage to all attacks. At level 1 that's 2 more damage than a greatsword. It gets weaker once they have 2 base attacks, depending on item bonuses etc. A couple flaming hand axes would be nice.

 

[S'mon]

I think the best approach is for level 11 fighter with 2wf style to get 2 off hand attacks with the bonus action.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I only made two small changes to DWing.

For the fighting style, I removed the requirement to spend a BA to get the extra attack.

For the feat, I added the ability to attune to two weapons that meet the criteria for DWing, as if they were one weapon.