D&D 4E What place does dual wielding have in 4E?

[Amphimir Míriel]

I like how they had it in 3.5 because it all came out very simple:

If you were two handed you got a bonus to attack and damage but gave up an AC bonus.

If you used a shield then you got an AC bonus but gave up an attack and damage bonus.

If you duel wielded then you gave up both the AC bonus and the bonus to attack and damage, but gained a higher probability to hit (even with the -2/-5/-10 for balance).

The problem with that is that the bonuses to attack and damage by two-handed weapon users were far better than the AC bonus granted to Shield users or the extra attacks granted to dual wielders. (the 3.5 version of Power Attack was also a big part of that problem)

So in 3.5 everybody and his mom used a greatsword... It was, quite simply, the best tactical option for a melee character in core 3.5 D&D

This, of course, was a consequence of how dual-wielding was way too powerful on 2nd edition (Bladesinger with spells and dual longswords, Im looking at you!)

As Mearls pointed out on a thread about shields, fighting styles are tricky, because if you are not careful to balance it out perfectly, everybody picks the same choice...

And by God, I want to be able to play a Sword-and-Board Paladin and have some cool 300-style shield shoves, bashes and charges... And I also want to be able to play a cuisinart-style dual wielding ranger (call it a drizzt clone if you wish... I was also playing similar characters before I even heard of Salvatore)

 

[Baron Opal]

In SWSE if you dual wield melee weapons to take a penalty to hit for an extra die of damage. There is one attack roll. Take that as you will.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I've played many many characters who wield two weapons over the years, and I am vaguely aware that Drzzt is some FR angsty-but-good drow ranger, but I honestly don't know anything about him.

Fitz

 

[RigaMortus2]

It probably works like, you make one attack roll at a penalty (-2 ?) and if you hit, you deal damage from each weapon. If you miss, you miss with both weapons. Basically all or nothing. Just my guess...

 

[BASHMAN]

I personally would like to see TWF resulting in increased accuracy, as opposed to increased defense with sword + board, or increased damage with two-handers. Probably a little more damage than the guy with the shield, but I don't think TWF should result purely in more damage.

I agree!

Two-Weapon Feint-- m, Standard, At Will. Your foe reacts to your attack from your sword, leaving an opening for your dagger to slip through
When wielding a weapon in each hand, roll 2d20 for the attack roll, taking the better of the two. For the damage roll, use the worse of the two.

Two-Weapon Combo m, Standard, Encounter In a flurry of dizzying speed, you become a whirling pinwheel of death
When wielding a weapon in each hand, make a weapon attack for each (against a single opponent).

Double Parry Immediate Reaction; Encounter You catch your enemies weapon between your two blades, turning a deadly strike into a miss
As an immediate reaction to a melee attack, roll an attack roll. Use the result as your Defense against the melee attack.

Shears of Fate Standard; Daily You bring your crossed swordarms together with a sickening slash as they pass one another
Roll two standard attacks against one opponent. If one hits, it does [W] damage+2. If both hit, they each do 2[W] damage.

And some higher level stuff:

Double Riposte Immediate Reaction; Encounter You raise your blade to catch your enemies attack, and strike low with your other blade When you are attacked in melee, rolll an attack roll as an immediate reaction. Your attack roll becomes your defense against that attack. If this prevented you from being hit, you may make an attack on that enemy as a free action.

And even sicker:

Deadly Riposte Immediate Reaction; Encounter You raise your blade to catch your enemies attack, and watch his eyes go from wide when your other blade impales him. This works like Double Riposte, but if you succeed in defending yourself, you may attack the enemy with +2 to hit, and 2[W] damage. If this bloodies the foe, it is also stunned until it begins its next turn.

 

[LowSpine]

I would guess it is a martial exploit of some description that just allows an extra basic attack (they aren't that great in 4E) perhaps as a move action with tree exploits that add to that such as offhand parry which adds to AC/Reflex. Just guessing.

 

[JVisgaitis]

I like the straight up idea of a penalty to hit and double the damage with one roll. That's nice and simple. If they do something silly like make it a once per encounter ability, I'll lose my mind.

 

[Syrsuro]

Hmm..

I certainly had never thought of it that way before - but I like the increased accuracy approach (instead of the increased damage or extra attack).

That is one of the advantages of two weapons - it is two different attacks that must be guarded against, and thus the likelihood of one of them slipping through your defenses is greater.

Of course - in the long run two rolls versus an increased accuracy with one roll is going to have similar effects (more damage). But increased accuracy is going to be less swingy (one attack to hit or miss, versus a range of two misses to two hits - potentially two crits), it is easier to model, and it makes them more different than the two-hander and sword and board.

Essentially you end up with:

Dual Wielder: More accuracy, base damage, base defense.
Two-handed: Base accuracy, more damage, base defense.
Sword and Board: Base accuracy, base damage, more defense.

IMHO, if they didn't do it this way, they should have.

Carl

 

[JVisgaitis]

Also, I hope its keyed off of dexterity and doesn't give a strength bonus.

 

[Voss]

In SWSE if you dual wield melee weapons to take a penalty to hit for an extra die of damage. There is one attack roll. Take that as you will.

No it isn't. Raid shot (and a melee version) work like that. Dual wield is separate attack rolls for an additional attack, with feats that slowly negate the penalty.