Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ClaytonCross" data-source="post: 7514816" data-attributes="member: 6880599">I agree with 90% of what your doing here. You have one think I like better and one I don't like as much as the ideas by me and 77IM.I really like this:"-Opens the door to unarmed strikes or natural attacks with TWF. Seems silly that 5e makes a distinction between these attack modalities, but apparently it does. This also means it is a tactic monsters can easily use against the party, even if they don't have melee weapons per se."I think the idea of using to off hand to engage is something that has been missing that I had not even considered until I saw your post but as a matter of coincidence I was fighting yesterday and one guy dropped his shield to practice fighting rapier and short sword separately using the off hand to hold the sword/arm, grapple, and disarm and he was actually ... attempting .. to follow some moves from an old manual. While he didn't do well yesterday, I have seen it happen and had it used on me by others so I would love to see it added to the game. I don't know that giving monks another strike is in combat is really a good or a bad thing ether however both my way and 77IM's would do the same thing. 77IM's would add two as a single class monk which might be pushing it.I disagree with this:-Allows more wide use of the reaction. In my gaming experience, reactions are seldom used except by Polearm Masters, Sentinels, or specific kinds of magic users. This widens their use.Almost every class has some sort of reaction defense and I really don't like the co-oping of reactions as substitute actions. Doing it as  free action as a result of using your action on your turn to make a make a melee attack does the same thing without switching the lost of a bonus action to a the lose of a reaction which is very close to a net zero gain. Other fighting styles don't have to take a reaction or bonus action lost to function normally and two-weapon fighting is not inherently any stronger than they are so their is no point in taxing it. If we are talking about encouraging its use we should make it tax free. With that in mind here is my adjusted suggestion:"Fighting with two light weapons and you are able to effectively attack and defend in melee switching roles between the two weapons. As a result when you are fighting only one opponent in melee within  5ft, you gain +2 AC vs Melee attacks only and you make your standard attacks with advantage. When you make a hit you may choose which weapon does the damage. Alternatively if you are fighting with one light weapon and nothing in the other hand vs a single opponent in melee within 5ft you may attempt to make unarmed strike a free action before rolling a melee weapon attack. If the unarmed strike is successful make your melee weapon attack at advantage. Once you take this free action you can not use it again until the start of your next turn." It now allows your off hand strike with one weapon but limits it to once per turn to prevent monk/Fighter abuse, since its and extra attack and the possibly of advantage.</blockquote>

Verification