D&D 5E Two Weapon Fighting

Just checking I've got this right: anyone can fight with two weapons, so long as they are Light (PHB p195).
Restrictions:
- Only Light weapons
- No Ability Mod to damage (unless it's negative) for second attack
- Uses a Bonus Action
- No negative to hit that I can see?

Best damage from a Light weapon is 1d6 (scimitar or shortsword for martial, or handaxe for simple).

Assuming a fairly average STR of 12 (+1), average DPR assuming two hits would be (3.5+1)+(3.5)=8

Two Attacks = two Attack rolls = two chances to Crit.

Compare the same character (STR 12) using the best possible martial weapon in average damage terms, the greatsword (2d6, two handed). Average damage is (3.5)+(3.5)+1, or 8. Exactly the same average but only one chance to Crit.

Max damage on the other hand (assuming no crits):
Two scimitars = (6+1)+6 = 13
Greatsword = (6+6)+1 = 13

Whatever the STR mod, it scales in the same way. But Scimitars and shortsword both count as Finesse so your DEXy midnight runners can take advantage of their high Dex. Only Wizards and Sorcerors don't have proficiency in the relevant weapon (ie simple weapons or one of the specifically stated weapons). Everyone else can take advantage of this. Bards, Monks, Barbarians, Rogues, Warlocks, Clerics, etc.

Even a Fighter taking Two Weapon Fighting Style needs to use Light weapons (only the DW feat permits better damage weapons, and Feats are Optional - so this doesn't take Feats like GWM into account).

It just occurred to me, that wielding two light weapons will generally be a much better tactic than one serious weapon for a lot of classes, if for no other reason than it gives you two chances to Crit.

I I know it uses your Bonus action but especially at lower levels folks like the Barbarian can go play with this and have fun.

Am I wrong here, have I missed something?

if I'm right, is this something others have noticed?

if so, have your players implemented it?

and if I'm right, is this not a bit broken?
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

G

Guest 6801328

Guest
Doubling your chance to crit doesn't really add anything, unless you have some other bonus whenever you crit. Twice the chance to get a crit, half as much benefit from doing so.
 

famousringo

First Post
You pretty much have it.

Wizards and sorcerers can two-weapon fight with daggers for a little less damage.

It's not broken at all though. Two-weapon fighting is more effective with Hex, Hunter's Mark, Sneak Attack and Smite, but you'll notice two of those require a bonus action to apply, so they compete with the attack itself. So while a dual-wielding warlock can Hex and attack for 2d6+Str on the first round, a greatsword warlock can Hex and hit for 3d6+Str. For sneak attackers, it also competes with Cunning Action. Take the damage or your mobility, can't have both. And crucially, there is no -5/+10 feat for dual-wielders to break the game with.

Two-handed fighting scales better with Extra Attack, Action Surge, feats, Haste, and opportunity attacks. And the feats are way, way better. If you can get a bonus attack, like frenzy barbarians, Great Weapon Masters or Polearm Masters, you'll do far more damage than a dual-wielder. Also leaves a hand semi-free for spellcasting.

Generally, dual-wielding works great for low level characters that don't have extra attacks, feats, or cool bonus actions. As you level up, it becomes a worse and worse option from an optimization standpoint.
 
Last edited:

I'm thinking for Raging Barbarians it works nicely as the +2 rage damage isn't classed as an Ability Modifier so it should still apply to the second attack. Which is nice.
 

mellored

Adventurer
What they said.

Unless you have something that happens on-hit, there's not much benefit from 1d6+1d6 over 2d6. Crits don't change that.

And given that multi-attack happens to the majority of weapon using classes. It becomes worse with 1d6+1d6+1d6 (3d6) compared to 2d6+2d6 (4d6).
Plus it uses your bonus action.


Though there are a few upsides, such as having 2 attacks let you potentially kill 2 kobolds instead of over killing 1. And there are a number of good on-hit effects, like sneak attack, rage, or improved smite that can make it work.
 

mellored

Adventurer
I'm thinking for Raging Barbarians it works nicely as the +2 rage damage isn't classed as an Ability Modifier so it should still apply to the second attack. Which is nice.
Yes, barbs are a good candidate for TWF.

Though don't forget that rage takes a bonus action to start. So you can't TWF on your first turn.
 

LightningArrow

First Post
If you have no constant use for a bonus action and don't want a shield, it's good. Otherwise, problems arise very quickly.
At low levels, I say it's the best fighting style, but it gets to be the worst at higher ones.
Also remember that you can add DEX to damage in 3.5, seems to me you're thinking in 3.5 style (like I used to).
 

Kithas

First Post
Barbarians, rogues(more chances to sneak atk), and paladins are the best options for twf. Anyone using hex/hunters mark or divine favor/crusaders mantle are also good. Basically more on hit effects the better twf is. In general a two handed weapon will be better after extra attack esp if you have a good use for your bonus action.
 

RulesJD

First Post
The biggest reason you don't see more TWF is the PAM feat. You get the bonus attack, that you can use GWM with, and your ability modifier with just 1 feat. Plus you get the added benefit of GWF style.

I'd say just let dual wielders have their ability modifier on both attacks and call it day.
 


Yunru

Banned
Banned
Personally I house rule Two Weapon Fighting Style to allow Extra attack to apply to the bonus attack in place of the +ability mod.
Comparing GWF to TWF:
1 attack: 2d6+Mod vs 2d6+Mod: +1.3333333... to GWF
2 attacks: 4d6+2*Mod vs 4d6+Mod: +Mod+2.666666... to GWF
3 attacks: 6d6+3*Mod vs 6d6+Mod: +4+2*Mod to GWF

As you can see, GWF still wins.
But compare New to Old:
No Extra Attack: 2d6+Mod vs. 2d6+2*Mod: Old wins by a whole Modifier. But this is unlikely unless your a Rogue, in which case it's insignificant vs getting an extra shot at Sneak Attack anyway.
Extra Attack (1): 4d6+2*Mod vs. 3d6+3*Mod: 14 vs 10.5+Mod: Old wins if your mod is >3.5 and you have no on-hit.
Extra Attack (2): 6d6+3*Mod vs. 4d6+4*Mod: 21 vs 14+Mod: Old wins only if your mod is >7. Good luck.
Extra Attack (3): 8d6+4*Mod vs. 5d6+5*Mod: 28 vs 17.5+Mod: Old if your mod is >10.5

Also look at it thematically: You go Two-Weapon Fighting because you want to be a blur of blades. The new way is. The old way... isn't.
 
Last edited:

I was originally posting about Two Weapon Fighting which is open to all, rather than the Fighter-specific TWF fighting Style, but, that said...

What your house rule does is to break the basic structure of the combat round, which allows only one Bonus Action (ie Offhand Attack) per round.

Essentially for those with a Extra Attacks you are granting them the ability to significantly increase their attacks:
No Extra Attacks = 2 total attacks inc Offhand (as normal)
1 Extra Attack = 4 total attacks inc 2 Offhands (where 3 total is normal = 33% more)
2 Extra Attacks = 6 total attacks inc 3 Offhands (where 4 total is normal = 50% more)
3 Extra Attacks = 8 total attacks inc 4 Offhands (where 5 total is normal = 60% more)

Essentially you're granting up to 4 Bonus Actions per round. That seems pretty broken to me.

Do you allow a similar action economy for other classes/abilities/types of attacks eg spell attacks?
 

Yunru

Banned
Banned
Uh no, I'm not. You still only have the one bonus action. You just make up to four attacks (feature dependent) instead of one.
That's like saying "Extra Attack breaks the basic structure of the combat round, which only allows one action per round." - It's simply not true.

As for increasing the number of attacks: Yes it does more damage, but it still does less damage than a regular old 2-hander. Unless you use an on-hit bonuses, which normally take a bonus action to set up, which is a lot higher cost now.
 
Last edited:

Kithas

First Post
Uh no, I'm not. You still only have the one bonus action. You just make up to four attacks (feature dependent) instead of one.
That's like saying "Extra Attack breaks the basic structure of the combat round, which only allows one action per round." - It's simply not true.

As for increasing the number of attacks: Yes it does more damage, but it still does less damage than a regular old 2-hander. Unless you use an on-hit bonuses, which normally take a bonus action to set up, which is a lot higher cost now.
I like your idea. Personally id limit it to extra attack and not the extra attack(2) or(3). Hex and hunters mark arent the only on hits, divine favor, improved divine smite, elemental weapon all only take one bonus action far tho whole encounter and are generally better than tex/wark for that reason.
 

My group has changed the DW feat to grant +1 ac and allows you to make 2 attacks with your off hand weapon when you use your bonus action. This way a 5th level human with dw & twf is doing 7.5 x4 = 30 damage vs gwm 13 x 3 = 39 damage vs pm 11.5 x 2 + 7.5 = 30.5 damage
 
Last edited:

Uh no, I'm not. You still only have the one bonus action. You just make up to four attacks (feature dependent) instead of one.
That's like saying "Extra Attack breaks the basic structure of the combat round, which only allows one action per round." - It's simply not true

Couple of things:

1. Extra Attack doesn't break anything, you can take one Action. If you take the Attack Action, you may make as many individual Attacks within that Action as your class/race/feats allow. Most classes can use the Attack Action to make one Attack; certain classes (eg Fighter) are so skilled they can make multiple Attacks within the time taken to perform the Attack Action.

2. I may be mistaken in my analysis of your maths (it's not immediately clear and broken down for a bear of little brain such as myself). Please do explain how you get to roll a total of 8d6 for taking "up to four attacks" plus one Bonus Action (offhand) Attack - surely that is a total of 5d6 only?

The Extra Attack class feature states that "you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack Action on your turn."

A Bonus Action is not a full Action. You don't get the full number of Attacks you could take using the Attack Action when you use a Bonus Action. a Bonus Action only allows one additional Attack.

From Sage Advice:

image.jpg
 
Last edited:

Yunru

Banned
Banned
2. I may be mistaken in my analysis of your maths (it's not immediately clear and broken down for a bear of little brain such as myself). Please do explain how you get to roll a total of 8d6 for taking "up to four attacks" plus one Bonus Action (offhand) Attack - surely that is a total of 5d6 only?

The Extra Attack class feature states that "you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack Action on your turn."

A Bonus Action is not a full Action. You don't get the full number of Attacks you could take using the Attack Action when you use a Bonus Action. a Bonus Action only allows one additional Attack.

That's easy: you don't. You roll 4d6 from your four attacks with your action, and 4d6 from your four attacks with your one bonus action.
Personally I house rule Two Weapon Fighting Style to allow Extra attack to apply to the bonus attack
L2R
 

See the Sage Advice quote from Mike Mearls in my last post, that explains quite explicitly that you only get ONE attack from a Bonus Action, any multiple attacks are only taken on your Action.

Sorry, your house rule is massively overpowered and does break the combat round.
 


Yunru

Banned
Banned
See the Sage Advice quote from Mike Mearls in my last post, that explains quite explicitly that you only get ONE attack from a Bonus Action, any multiple attacks are only taken on your Action.

Sorry, your house rule is massively overpowered and does break the combat round.
And when you actually provide maths to back that up, I might start to listen. Unfortunately you haven't.

Really? "learn to read"?

Don't be so rude. There is no need for that.

Yes "learn to read", I suggest you start with the definition of "house rule" since you appear to believe that nothing is above the devs and that Extra Attack can't apply to bonus actions because it doesn't in vanilla.

As for being rude, I'm not the one slinging around baseless accusations, or patronizingly linking dev tweets (which, again, are completely irrelevant because, hello, houserule).
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top