D&D 5E Scaling the number of off-hand attacks?

[doctorhook]

A two-weapon warrior (fighter, barbarian, etc.) gets Extra Attack at 5th level. Rules as written, he or she now gets three attacks (2 main hand + 1 off hand) rather than two (1 main hand, 1 off-hand). Why not just let off-hand attacks scale upwards as well? For example, why not let a TWF 5th-level barbarian have two main-hand and two off-hand attacks for the cost of an action and bonus action?

I'm not looking for an explanation so much as a discussion of the rationale. What would be the consequences of allowing this in my game?

As always, thanks for your input, gang.

 

[Sunseeker]

Personally, I wouldn't give the player any more than one additional off-hand attack. It's just too many dice.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Against a single target, the damage from the weapon die is less important than the modifier from your Strength bonus. The off-hand attack from TWF lets you add your Strength bonus one additional time per attack action. If you could add it two or three times, then that would be significantly more powerful than using a single weapon.

Against multiple targets, the extra attack lets you kill an extra goblin every round. If you could make two or three bonus attacks, then you would kill twice as many minions in a single round instead of killing one additional minion every round. They want TWF to be better in this situation, but not twice as good.

 

[redrick]

A two-weapon warrior (fighter, barbarian, etc.) gets Extra Attack at 5th level. Rules as written, he or she now gets three attacks (2 main hand + 1 off hand) rather than two (1 main hand, 1 off-hand). Why not just let off-hand attacks scale upwards as well? For example, why not let a TWF 5th-level barbarian have two main-hand and two off-hand attacks for the cost of an action and bonus action?

I'm not looking for an explanation so much as a discussion of the rationale. What would be the consequences of allowing this in my game?

As always, thanks for your input, gang.

Even without factoring in the TWF fighting style bonus, this is too good.

With a greatsword, you do 2d6 + STR with one attack against one creature. With two short-swords, you do 2d6 + DEX with two attacks against two potential targets. So you are never at a disadvantage to the greatsword wielder (since you can always just attack the same target twice), and at an advantage in any situation where breaking up your attack is advantageous.

Once you get to 5th level, the short-sword wielder can take out 4 goblins, while the great-sword wielder can take out 2. Action surge... 8 vs 4. That's before you even get to the way that the fighting style bonus would scale.

 

[leinadvirgo]

If i was of mind to give the two weapon pcs more of an advantage, I wouldn't give them more attacks but maybe allow adding the offhand damage roll to successive attacks. this means each attack would do an additional d6 (or d8 with feat). so no better at hitting more enemies but able to keep up with damage with 2 handed weapons. though since it might be too powerful I might say you can only add half stat modifier to each attack or take penalty to ac on rounds where you use this action.

I don't have much xp with the higher levels so maybe someone with a little more xp could confirm (or somebody that is willing to crunch some numbers).

 

[Unwise]

TWF needs a bit of help once somebody gets to three attacks total, not something that that anybody but a fighter will come across. At one attack, it is better than a two-hander, at two attacks they are effectively even, its only really at three that they become a bad option.

Barbarians are an unusual case, they do seem to have a lot of reasons to prefer 2H over TWF. Rage takes a bonus action, they don't get a weapon style, feat support is much better for 2H among other things. They might be the exception that needs a small helping hand if it is important to you to have TWF Barbarians. Getting the rage bonus with the off-hand helps the maths a bit I suspect. I came across this issue in my game, so I had the barbarian find a "tomahawk of rage", which let you activate rage when you attack with it, thus getting rid of the bonus action issue there.

 

[CapnZapp]

A two-weapon warrior (fighter, barbarian, etc.) gets Extra Attack at 5th level. Rules as written, he or she now gets three attacks (2 main hand + 1 off hand) rather than two (1 main hand, 1 off-hand). Why not just let off-hand attacks scale upwards as well? For example, why not let a TWF 5th-level barbarian have two main-hand and two off-hand attacks for the cost of an action and bonus action?

I'm not looking for an explanation so much as a discussion of the rationale. What would be the consequences of allowing this in my game?

As always, thanks for your input, gang.

If you change this to
1) only fighters
2) at level 11, not before
I think your game will be fine

 

[guachi]

I'll second what CapnZapp said. Both of his points. TWF eventually falls behind the other styles at 11+ for fighters. I think the damage of an extra on the bonus action for TWF at 11+ is really close to the other styles.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I'm not looking for an explanation so much as a discussion of the rationale.

Part of the rationale is probably the weight of tradition. In AD&D, dual-wielding gave you one extra attack per round (per limb, IIRC the rules for Thri-kreen). In other games like GURPS, it gives you zero extra attacks. 5E sticks with AD&D style except with monks, who are somewhat more GURPS-like in that having a free hand/two feet/two knees/two elbows grants you only one extra attack, not seven.

Therefore, one ramification of granting scaling with off-hand attacks is that you'd have an even harder time explaining why monks don't get more than one bonus attack when they use Martial Arts.

 

[CapnZapp]

I'll second what CapnZapp said. Both of his points. TWF eventually falls behind the other styles at 11+ for fighters. I think the damage of an extra on the bonus action for TWF at 11+ is really close to the other styles.

Thanks.

I guess you could make it into a class feature, say "improved twf" or something, and then add this feature to the fighter class at level 11...

...as well as level 11 rangers (respect of tradition), even though they do not get a regular third attack.