D&D 5E Two-Weapon Fighting Idea

[Chris_Nightwing]

When you take into account extra damage you only get when at least one of your two attacks hit (Deadly Strike for example), then TWF comes out better. If you include criticals, TWF comes out better.

For balance, you either have two attacks which don't have as good average damage, but let you connect more frequently for Deadly Strike etc. or you have just one with some additional damage/effect from the second weapon.

 

[Blackbrrd]

That might work for balancing, but it is not satisfying to me. If I'm gonna have two attacks, I don't want the other one to only hit when the first one hits. If I have to settle for that, I'd rather go for the simplicity of one attack with a bonus.

Blackbrrd. If it's just a "flavor" thing, and not also it's own mechanical niche, I wouldn't be happy. Correct me if I'm wrong, but with your original method the average damage per round might be the same as a heavy weapon, but the damage on any given round is much more likely to be close to the middle, and not as swingy as the single two-hander. That would give it it's own niche, so I'd be satisfied. Another question. When you figure in the increased chance for critical hits and the bonus damage in the current playtest, would it bring two-weapon fighting ahead of two-handed?

One more thing. I think the damage you have for the greatsword is off. You have it listed as 2d6, but the actual statistic is 1d12. That would mean
Greatsword at 50% accuracy equals 5.75 damage.
Putting it ever so slightly behind. Combining that with increased frequency of bonus damage from criticals would increase this a little further. I'm guessing about 1/2 a point in favor of two-weapon fighting for both the .25 discrepancy and the crits together. This isn't game breaking, but it is worth noting.

I basically agree with nearly all your points here, also when it comes to the point where you want TWF to have it's own niche mechanically, "averager" damage.

In which case, my first suggestion for TWF works out best, even if I don't think it's as elegant a solution.

Btw, I am only disagreeing with you on the point about crits - you can't get any bonus damage for your off-hand weapon ever. Neither from crits, maneuvers, flaming blade or anything else. Otherwise there is bound to be some damage boosting mechanic that gets twice as good for TWF as it would for S&B or THF.

 

[kerleth]

Okay, I'm coming around to blackbrrd's idea as the most promising. So here is my stab at the "rulespeak" and the beginnings of a specialty.

RULES TEXT
When wielding a pair of finesse/light weapons or a dagger and any other weapon you may use an action to attack one creature with both weapons. Designate one weapon as your main weapon and the other as your off-hand weapon for this attack. Roll both attack rolls and the damage for your main weapon normally. The damage for your off-hand weapon does not gain any bonuses or penalties from your ability score, weapon enhancement, spells, abilities, or other effects. Neither does it deal additional damage on a critical hit, though a critical hit still yields a maximum on the damage die roll.
END RULES TEXT

Two-Weapon Fighting Specialist

1st level feat
Dervish
Benefit: When attacking with two weapons you may attack a creature with one weapon, spend any of your remaining movement, and then attack the same or a different creature with the other weapon.

3rd level feat
Skillful Deflection
Benefit: When wielding two weapons or a shield you gain a +1 bonus to AC.

6th level feat*
Two-Weapon Supremacy
Requirement: 6th level
Benefit: When attacking a single creature with two weapons you may roll both attack rolls simultaneously. The higher attack roll is used for your main weapon and the lower for your off-hand.
*EDIT: This one is probably a little too good. I was concerned when I made it, and some posters (though not all) have also expressed this concern. Suggestions? END EDIT

9th level feat
For the Win
Benefit: At the beginning of each game session the DM gives you a cookie.
(Open to suggestions).


This method seems simple to understand and use, balanced, and feels like I'm using two weapons. Since I'm incredibly pleased I'm going to do my best to break it, to see if it can take it.
Racial weapon familiarity alters the weapon's base damage die. So the rule about bonuses may not apply. A race that had familiarity with say, shortswords, would have 2d8s, where as a single race with a heavy weapon familiarity, say axes, would be using 2d6. That is 2 points of average damage difference.

Questions
1)Is this corner case a big enough deal to worry about?
2)Is the problem with two-weapon fighting or racial familiarities?
(Please no cries about the halfling, there are any number of racial concepts that are non-halfing that would make sense for the shortsword, and still create this issue).
3)Is there a way to phrase the rules around this problem without getting too complicated or gamey?

EDIT: This problem is solved by simply changing the d12 heavy weapons to 2d6. Racial weapon familiarity would then increase this number to 2d8. I don't think that really affects balance elsewhere. If nothing else it throws a bone to the greataxe wielding dwarven warrior. We all know that WOTC is run by a conspiracy of high elves as it is.

I'm editting my initial post to link to this version, so we might get a better spread of new ideas and opinions.
Chris, you have been one of the most vocal supporters of a "one attack" system. If this appeared in the next playtest packet, what would your response be?
Thanks all.

 

[Blackbrrd]

6th level feat
Two-Weapon Supremacy
Benefit: When attacking a single creature with two weapons you may roll both attack rolls simultaneously. The higher attack roll is used for your main weapon and the lower for your off-hand.

I really like the idea, but it comes really close to giving you the equivalent of always-on advantage. Much too powerful.

I have no idea on how to solve the racial weapon familiarity bonuses. At early levels the difference is significant.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Two Weapon Defense irks me, unless we boost the standard "small" shield gets +2 to AC (with buckler as +1). If the standard shield is +1 (as per the current 5E playtest rules), then you've just made TWF strictly better than sword & board.

Otherwise, looking good. I really don't have a problem with the concept of "always on" advantage, since it only applies to one weapon, not both, and the rule is two light weapons or dagger+weapon.

 

[kerleth]

Two things.

One: I have figured out the problem with racial weapon familiarity. Simply change all the base damage values for 1d12 weapons to 2d6. Then a heavy weapon + racial familiarity would be boosted to 2d8, same as a pair of boosted short swords. All the other heavy weapons have an ability like reach, whose usefulness is circumstantial and can't be directly balanced versus a 1d12/2d6 weapon anyways. As far as sword and board, it's usefulness fluctuates based on the number of creatures attacking you, and small AC boosts are generally more powerful than they appear.

Two: Olgar, I understand your worry about shields, but bear in mind that your are comparing a two-weapon fighting FEAT to a shield bearer WITHOUT A FEAT.
What if I turned the feat into this:
Skillful Deflection
Benefit: When wielding two weapons or a shield you gain a +1 bonus to AC.

Then it could also be used in a specialty for a sword and board character equally.

I'm editing these two changes into my previous post, FYI.


ALSO, the specialty feats are just quick brainstorming. What I'm really interested in is whether or not the base system works.

 

[ren1999]

O.k. How about this. Every character and monster gets only 1 main attack per turn.

At 5th level, a character can get an off-hand weapon attack but it must always do at least 1 die less damage than the main weapon.

If the character casts a spell, then no main or off-hand attacks.

At 10th level, a character can have a main attack, an off-hand weapon lesser damage attack, and a kick. For a monk, 2 punches and a kick for example. For a monster, 1 main claw attack for full damage, a second claw attack for less damage, and a bite.

What do you think about this? A dodge or parry action could have the same value as an off-hand attack.

 

[kerleth]

Myself, I don't like it. I see no good reason why I can't have a 1st level character trained in using two weapons. I would rather just turn it into a bonus to attack than have to wait five levels to make wielding a sword and dagger a viable option.

That said, perhaps a single attack option with some sort of bonus could be combined with your idea to get another attack later on. Getting either an attack or parry option does sound interesting. Your way would have it's own set of balance issues with a two-handed weapon though, I think.

All in all though, the idea doesn't sound like it would accomplish both of my main concerns
1)balance and simplicity
2)"feel" like attacking with two weapons for those who prefer two attacks

Still, I'm open to trying it. Would you care to mock up some more specific rules for it, ren?

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

Okay, I'm coming around to blackbrrd's idea as the most promising. So here is my stab at the "rulespeak" and the beginnings of a specialty.

RULES TEXT
When wielding a pair of finesse/light weapons or a dagger and any other weapon you may use an action to attack one creature with both weapons. Designate one weapon as your main weapon and the other as your off-hand weapon for this attack. Roll both attack rolls and the damage for your main weapon normally. The damage for your off-hand weapon does not gain any bonuses or penalties from your ability score, weapon enhancement, spells, abilities, or other effects. Neither does it deal additional damage on a critical hit, though a critical hit still yields a maximum on the damage die roll.
END RULES TEXT

Two-Weapon Fighting Specialist

1st level feat
Dervish
Benefit: When attacking with two weapons you may attack a creature with one weapon, spend any of your remaining movement, and then attack the same or a different creature with the other weapon.

3rd level feat
Skillful Deflection
Benefit: When wielding two weapons or a shield you gain a +1 bonus to AC.

6th level feat
Two-Weapon Supremacy
Requirement: 6th level
Benefit: When attacking a single creature with two weapons you may roll both attack rolls simultaneously. The higher attack roll is used for your main weapon and the lower for your off-hand.

9th level feat
For the Win
Benefit: At the beginning of each game session the DM gives you a cookie.
(Open to suggestions).


This method seems simple to understand and use, balanced, and feels like I'm using two weapons. Since I'm incredibly pleased I'm going to do my best to break it, to see if it can take it.
Racial weapon familiarity alters the weapon's base damage die. So the rule about bonuses may not apply. A race that had familiarity with say, shortswords, would have 2d8s, where as a single race with a heavy weapon familiarity, say axes, would be using 2d6. That is 2 points of average damage difference.

Questions
1)Is this corner case a big enough deal to worry about?
2)Is the problem with two-weapon fighting or racial familiarities?
(Please no cries about the halfling, there are any number of racial concepts that are non-halfing that would make sense for the shortsword, and still create this issue).
3)Is there a way to phrase the rules around this problem without getting too complicated or gamey?

EDIT: This problem is solved by simply changing the d12 heavy weapons to 2d6. Racial weapon familiarity would then increase this number to 2d8. I don't think that really affects balance elsewhere. If nothing else it throws a bone to the greataxe wielding dwarven warrior. We all know that WOTC is run by a conspiracy of high elves as it is.

I'm editting my initial post to link to this version, so we might get a better spread of new ideas and opinions.
Chris, you have been one of the most vocal supporters of a "one attack" system. If this appeared in the next playtest packet, what would your response be?
Thanks all.

I think.. I think that looks ok. If the offhand can never do anything but 1d6 (or 1d8) extra damage, can never deal sneak attack or deadly strike or anything else, then the balance works out. At this point though, to me, it's lost the sense of being proper two-weapon fighting - you're actually just offering a small, highly variable bonus to damage each round. I think that would be better as a straightforward fixed bonus to damage each round - say you get +1d6 damage on your single attack, and if you miss but hit 10+ modified, you deal half of 1d6 with your offhand - very similar but only one dice roll.

If you want the two attacks to be simulated as two individual attacks, then balance can only be found in reducing their average damage to less than that of a 2HW. The compensation is getting to deal your rider damage (sneak attack, deadly strike) more often.

Either way, your first suggested feat is definitely too powerful, as said, it's advantage on your primary attack, but better!

 

[ren1999]

O.k. I like the no bonus ideas.

How about this.

1st level, two weapon fighting feat option, 1 main attack, 1 off-hand weapon attack with no bonus and a lower hit die than the main attack.

5th level, 1 main and 1 off-hand both have full bonuses

10th level, 1 main, 1 off-hand, and 1 kick.