Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 8994336" data-attributes="member: 6801845">There were historical periods when rapiers became popular for both self defense and duels, starting in the late 16th century. There were schools dedicated to fighting with rapiers and a few did teach two weapon fighting.&nbsp; But there are other instances of two weapon fighting throughout history, typically with what D&amp;D would consider short swords.&nbsp; It was unusual, but people have been quite creative about how to kill each other for a long time.&nbsp; Unlike D&amp;D the off-hand weapon was primarily defensive.So from a historical perspective it did exist and there are historical exceptions for even things like fighting with two broadswords [<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_wield" target="_blank">1</a>], even if it was uncommon.In D&amp;D?&nbsp; I think it works as intended.&nbsp; I wrote a combat simulation app for this a while back that pitted the core fighting styles against various monsters.&nbsp; Two-weapon fighter came out on top for the other core fighting styles at most levels. Shield master is slightly better at some levels if the DM let's you attempt to knock people prone before making any attacks.&nbsp; I think people tend to overestimate the utility of GWM considering the lower AC and negative to hit.&nbsp; So I don't see an issue with it.&nbsp; Yeah, you never saw people in full plate dual wielding but D&amp;D is far too abstract and simplified for combat details like that to be simulated.&nbsp; Historically it was used, even if it was rare.&nbsp; From a game perspective it's quite effective, something I've also seen playing Solasta which records all sorts of stats for your PCs over the course of a campaign.NOTE: My simulation looked at simple mano-e-monster combat of course, so battle masters just did extra damage, I didn't attempt to simulate things like rune knight's abilities.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Oofta, post: 8994336, member: 6801845"] There were historical periods when rapiers became popular for both self defense and duels, starting in the late 16th century. There were schools dedicated to fighting with rapiers and a few did teach two weapon fighting. But there are other instances of two weapon fighting throughout history, typically with what D&D would consider short swords. It was unusual, but people have been quite creative about how to kill each other for a long time. Unlike D&D the off-hand weapon was primarily defensive. So from a historical perspective it did exist and there are historical exceptions for even things like fighting with two broadswords [[URL='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_wield']1[/URL]], even if it was uncommon. In D&D? I think it works as intended. I wrote a combat simulation app for this a while back that pitted the core fighting styles against various monsters. Two-weapon fighter came out on top for the other core fighting styles at most levels. Shield master is slightly better at some levels [I]if[/I] the DM let's you attempt to knock people prone before making any attacks. I think people tend to overestimate the utility of GWM considering the lower AC and negative to hit. So I don't see an issue with it. Yeah, you never saw people in full plate dual wielding but D&D is far too abstract and simplified for combat details like that to be simulated. Historically it was used, even if it was rare. From a game perspective it's quite effective, something I've also seen playing Solasta which records all sorts of stats for your PCs over the course of a campaign. NOTE: My simulation looked at simple mano-e-monster combat of course, so battle masters just did extra damage, I didn't attempt to simulate things like rune knight's abilities. [/QUOTE]

Verification