Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Removing the Bonus Action from Two-Weapon Fighting
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Lord Twig" data-source="post: 6919175" data-attributes="member: 31754"><p>I'll agree that it is subjective.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And looking at the numbers again (as I did in my last post) it does look a lot better for the two-weapon Fighter, especially at level 1 through 4. Except when he uses his bonus action for something else (and which my proposed rule addresses), which is something the other two styles don't have to deal with.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>As I have discovered, you are absolutely correct at lower levels, but it falls behind at higher levels. I can also see a Barbarian mix doing well as the increased stat bonus would be enhanced by the extra attack. The feat also helps a lot, as I mentioned above. All of these facts convinced me that the damage level is fine and I shouldn't mess with it. I am just removing the conflict of the bonus action so the two-weapon wielder's damage is not reduced.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, I don't think you can know the designer's intent any better than I can. But I would be surprised if they intended a sword and board fighter to be better at offense than a two-weapon fighter.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>They both seem like offensive styles to me. The two-handed style is (to me) focused on big hits for massive damage. Two weapons suggests lots of attacks where the damage adds up.</p><p></p><p>I am perfectly okay with the two-handed weapon doing more damage, that seems to be what it is all about. And really using two weapons seems to be mostly about damage as well. The only thing that isn't offensive is the +1 AC in the Feat, which really isn't much.</p><p> </p><p>What seems the most out of place, looking at the numbers, is the clearly superior damage that two weapon fighting does at levels 1 through 4. I would prefer that it fall between the other two and remain there while scaling up with them. Instead we have a system where it starts great, then slowly becomes the worst of the three as everyone gets better at what they do.</p><p></p><p>If everyone takes their assigned Feat at level 6 it smooths things out a bit and works pretty well. However, if a Variant Human grabs the Dual Wielder Feat at level 1 it becomes even more <strong>un</strong>balanced at lower levels.</p><p></p><p>Edit: Added the 'un' in unbalanced. That typo completely changed the meaning of that sentence. Oops.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lord Twig, post: 6919175, member: 31754"] I'll agree that it is subjective. And looking at the numbers again (as I did in my last post) it does look a lot better for the two-weapon Fighter, especially at level 1 through 4. Except when he uses his bonus action for something else (and which my proposed rule addresses), which is something the other two styles don't have to deal with. As I have discovered, you are absolutely correct at lower levels, but it falls behind at higher levels. I can also see a Barbarian mix doing well as the increased stat bonus would be enhanced by the extra attack. The feat also helps a lot, as I mentioned above. All of these facts convinced me that the damage level is fine and I shouldn't mess with it. I am just removing the conflict of the bonus action so the two-weapon wielder's damage is not reduced. Well, I don't think you can know the designer's intent any better than I can. But I would be surprised if they intended a sword and board fighter to be better at offense than a two-weapon fighter. They both seem like offensive styles to me. The two-handed style is (to me) focused on big hits for massive damage. Two weapons suggests lots of attacks where the damage adds up. I am perfectly okay with the two-handed weapon doing more damage, that seems to be what it is all about. And really using two weapons seems to be mostly about damage as well. The only thing that isn't offensive is the +1 AC in the Feat, which really isn't much. What seems the most out of place, looking at the numbers, is the clearly superior damage that two weapon fighting does at levels 1 through 4. I would prefer that it fall between the other two and remain there while scaling up with them. Instead we have a system where it starts great, then slowly becomes the worst of the three as everyone gets better at what they do. If everyone takes their assigned Feat at level 6 it smooths things out a bit and works pretty well. However, if a Variant Human grabs the Dual Wielder Feat at level 1 it becomes even more [B]un[/B]balanced at lower levels. Edit: Added the 'un' in unbalanced. That typo completely changed the meaning of that sentence. Oops. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Removing the Bonus Action from Two-Weapon Fighting
Top