Starting a new campaign soon, the DM has nerfed some of the feats, locked some feats against races etc, so while not wanting to go through all the choices available etc, just wanted to maybe bounce a couple of thoughts off people more experienced about what I should do. DM is a relatively new DM, and the other players (including myself) are fairly new, so I would like some more experienced opinions.
The battlemaster subclass seems very underwhelming to me, lack of bonus actions, the first 2 class features (student of war + know your enemy) adds to the story + theme but not the performance in battle, only 4 superiority dice (although recovers with short rests). Just seems like I will be losing lots of "opportunities" with missing bonus actions (compared to a paladin where a bonus action can be used very effectively for a range of other things). So I took a look at dual wielding.
Currently my character is optimised for DEX instead of STR, Since it can count towards armor, attack and initiative versus attack and maybe getting heavy armor.. And last campaign I found having more CON better than +1 or +2 higher AC.
Anyway, campaign only goes to ~lv.11, no need to worry about anything higher than that. - TWF with the dual wielding fighting style would make it 2 attacks at low level, D6 dice for both, making AC =16, 2 attacks with D6 + dex + prof. At higher levels, it would be 3 or 4 attacks (so just 1 more attack as a bonus action), and if not I can still use a superiority dice and use a bonus action to add a D10 to an attack etc (depending on the maneuver). With an action serge I'd get 1 more attack making 4 attacks total possible at lv.11 .. Good bonus through whole campaign from what I can see. - Alternatively 1 weapon + shield would be D8, 1 less attack.. AC = 18 (+2 shield). Meaning 1 attack at low level, 3 attacks at level 11.. slightly less damage taken (about 10%?) but seems like doing less damage overall so I'll be in close combat for longer wouldn't I?
I've heard it said that an additional attack is generally preferred (over advantage) since you have the possibility of 2 attacks - surely the same applies to TWF vs weapon+shield?
So I guess the questions here are: in what scenarios would you pick one over the other? are there any shortfalls I may have missed (other than having to wait 1 turn to draw the second weapon for 'free')? Themeatically both work with the character I'm building, so there's no big drive either way from role playing.
If you take the dual wielder feat, you can get +1 AC when dual wielding (17 AC) and then you can also use rapiers so you would be able to do 2d8 damage + modifiers instead of 2d6. You could take variant human to get the feat at level 1 if you wanted or just wait till level 4 and take the feat then.
Dual wielding is, imo, sub-par. The feat makes it more bearable, but its still not ideal. It can help if you're a rogue, since it gives you a second chance to trigger a sneak attack, or a pally getting another chance to smite (though pallys don't get the fighting style), but what it works best for is a vehicle for delivering damage granted by some other ability. And don't forget dueling style gives you a +2 to damage on every hit, which can help mitigate the lost damage from an off hand attack.
But the bigger issue (which gets at your scenarios question) is your role in the party. Will you be tanking? Will others be tanking with you? If you're the only one, you really want that shield. If there are other front liners, you might not need it as much, but still it would be good. If you're not tanking much at all, then that can give you other options. And honestly, if you aren't going sword-and-board and are just looking to do damage, you're better off with a glaive or halberd and great weapon fighting style and polearm master/great weapon master feat combo (maybe with sentinel thrown in).
Dex builds are good and can be quite viable, so there's no problem there. You give up a point of AC (at 20 dex, more if you don't max it out) but you get a lot of other dex-related goodies, so the trade-off can be worth it. (and as smftre notes, the feat can make up that one AC point) However, if you do end up with a polearm, you'll want to go str based.
Battlemasters are generally very well regarded (never played one myself, so I'm just going by what I hear). Most fights only last 4-5 rounds, so four die will get you through a lot. And if there's a warlock in the party, they'll also want lots of short rests, and a few other classes will as well. Battlemasters aren't designed to do lots of damage, which seems like what you're focusing on. They're battlefield control, so you need to have a feel for which maneuver to do and when (knocking someone prone isn't just about giving you advantage, it's about giving the rogue advantage for their sneak attack, for example). They can take a bit more strategy to play effectively. (As an aside, they can be really cool with a dex build, since many of the maneuvers key of weapon attacks, not melee attacks, so you can still trigger them with ranged weapons. And as a dex character, you'll be very good with ranged. Battlemaster archers can actually work very well.)
Also, action surge is better than you're giving it credit for. When you take the attack action as a level 11 fighter, you get 3 attacks. When you action surge, you take the attack action again, meaning 3 more attacks (Not just 1. You get the full benefit of taking the attack action). if you're two-weapon, you can add in another, single attack for 7 total attacks at level 11.
If you take the dual wielder feat, you can get +1 AC when dual wielding (17 AC) and then you can also use rapiers so you would be able to do 2d8 damage + modifiers instead of 2d6. You could take variant human to get the feat at level 1 if you wanted or just wait till level 4 and take the feat then.
I am personally partial to Rapier and Whip myself. The damage output is a teenytiny bit lower, but the options available with the 10-foot reach are a strong compensation IMHO.
Battle Masters are amazing. Truly. My personal preference is a Dex build taking Archery Fighting Style. The sheer amount of pain you can deliver with that is incredible.
Honestly, IMHO, if you want to make the most out of Superiority Dice, either ranged or reach weapons will do you better. The ability to use the right maneuver on the right target at the right time is incomparable. So, if you want to do the melee thing I would recommend Great Weapon Fighting and go for a reach weapon. (Either that or accept the lower damage due and use a whip.)
FYI: When you Action Surge it isn’t “1 Attack,” it’s an entire other action. So if you decide to use it for the Attack action, at 11th level that’s an entire additional 3 attacks. But honestly, don’t think it has to be the Attack Action, there are a lot of things you can do with an action.
Yeah, unfortunately some of the feats are nerfed for being overpowered, and a couple aren't in the race I want - so no access to great weapon master, polearm, or dual wield feats (otherwise I would have deffo gone single+shield and not had a second thought).
Thanks for correcting me on my misinterpretation of the "extra attack" + "second wind".. Didn't realise they worked that well together and doubled the attacks... If that's the case I assume I did Paladin wrong last time when I cast haste (extra action and extra attack should have been 4 attacks instead of 3?).
Although not concentrating on damage, I obviously did think battlefighter would be doing more melee and physical damage (not as much as barbarian). I've been in fights where there's a few rounds TBH (few bad rolls, number of enemies and just high HP of enemies vs our damage), another reason for the semi-optimisation (I don't want to find out I crippled myself by halfing the damage I could have been doing and cause the team to struggle).
And yes, also thanks about the maneuvers suggestions about the tactical side of things, I can definitely see the benefit of using commanders strike when I get 3 attacks, I will consider the others more depending on the battlefields we come across (closer areas may allow me to use them to good effect for the team).
In our previous campaign we did use some feats - but not many. This one we are all getting one from the restricted set we have access to off the bat, making variant humans irrelevant.
Regarding my role in the party: I knew 1 other would be a bard, I am playing her "protector" as a fighter. After this was mostly worked out I've found out there will be 2 other front liners (Monk and Barbarian) with a possible 5th joining. So I was going to be mid-to-front, didn't really want a ranged character (the damage was always just so low in the last game) - but might be more fitting for the party... I'll mull that over too.
I would have advised your group not include Feats at all.
Battlemasters are super fun. And many of their maneuvers add the Superiority die to the damage. So you can really whack something hard.
I totally agree. Feats are the one major thing I hate about 5e. They are horribly unbalanced and I refuse to allow them at my tables, and I cringe when someone mentions them. No one says, "I'm taking the Actor feat" because the option is to always go Sharpshooter/ Crossbow Expert or Sentinel/ PAM.
Duel wielding pays off at lower levels, but tapers off in usefulness hard over time. You are investing a fighting style, less ac, and a feat into it too, which is a lot.
A sword and board battlemaster dex fighter isn't something to sneeze at. If you can get enough short rests, you can pretend your rapier is better than a long sword in terms of damage. And all the maneuvers with control features just help to increase the damage you and your allies can do, while limiting what enemies are capable of doing. Battlemaster is basically the strongest fighter subclass.
And this frees up that feat you would have put into TWF. You can get another martial dice (which I think you can do multiple times), or pick up Hex or Blessing from magic initiate, or Alert, or a myriad of UA feats that would be fun if your DM allows it.
Two-Weapon Fighting starts off strong, but it pretty much breaks even with Extra Attack. And with every additional attack with a bigger weapon, it falls further behind. It really shines when you have extra dice to roll, like with the ranger's hunter's mark. And the only way to get that is by multiclassing, so we'll forget it for now.
The big question here is which sounds better? It's +1 AC vs an extra 1d8 weapon. That said, it also requires your bonus action, which some maneuvers compete with. So, if you decide to embrace TWF, you'll be eliminating some manevers. By the same token, you give yourself one more chance to hit and use a maneuver.
I would have advised your group not include Feats at all.
Battlemasters are super fun. And many of their maneuvers add the Superiority die to the damage. So you can really whack something hard.
I totally agree. Feats are the one major thing I hate about 5e. They are horribly unbalanced and I refuse to allow them at my tables, and I cringe when someone mentions them. No one says, "I'm taking the Actor feat" because the option is to always go Sharpshooter/ Crossbow Expert or Sentinel/ PAM.
I’ve seen about 20 of the ones in the PHB used, I think. They may not all be equally good, but none of them are broken at least and a pretty big subset is certainly serviceable.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I would have advised your group not include Feats at all.
Battlemasters are super fun. And many of their maneuvers add the Superiority die to the damage. So you can really whack something hard.
I totally agree. Feats are the one major thing I hate about 5e. They are horribly unbalanced and I refuse to allow them at my tables, and I cringe when someone mentions them. No one says, "I'm taking the Actor feat" because the option is to always go Sharpshooter/ Crossbow Expert or Sentinel/ PAM.
I’ve seen about 20 of the ones in the PHB used, I think. They may not all be equally good, but none of them are broken at least and a pretty big subset is certainly serviceable.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I would have advised your group not include Feats at all.
Battlemasters are super fun. And many of their maneuvers add the Superiority die to the damage. So you can really whack something hard.
I totally agree. Feats are the one major thing I hate about 5e. They are horribly unbalanced and I refuse to allow them at my tables, and I cringe when someone mentions them. No one says, "I'm taking the Actor feat" because the option is to always go Sharpshooter/ Crossbow Expert or Sentinel/ PAM.
I’ve seen about 20 of the ones in the PHB used, I think. They may not all be equally good, but none of them are broken at least and a pretty big subset is certainly serviceable.
You have the right to that opinion, but I disagree.
When you can use a Bonus Action to completely offset a dramatic moment in the story, it is broken. Such as Shield Master being able to offset a Meteor Swarm from a big-bad you've been hunting down for 15 levels.
Feats in 5e are either "terribly broken" or "Useless compared to an ASI or other Feat"
I will never allow them at my tables because of that. And to double down on that opinion, I do not take them when I am playing in campaign, even if the DM allows them as an option.
Yeah, unfortunately some of the feats are nerfed for being overpowered, and a couple aren't in the race I want - so no access to great weapon master, polearm, or dual wield feats (otherwise I would have deffo gone single+shield and not had a second thought
If you can’t take the dual wield feat, then sword and board is definitely the way to go. And if you’re a protector, sentinel is a great feat, and look at cavalier, they’re very good at forcing people to attack them and at protecting others.
I would have advised your group not include Feats at all.
Battlemasters are super fun. And many of their maneuvers add the Superiority die to the damage. So you can really whack something hard.
I totally agree. Feats are the one major thing I hate about 5e. They are horribly unbalanced and I refuse to allow them at my tables, and I cringe when someone mentions them. No one says, "I'm taking the Actor feat" because the option is to always go Sharpshooter/ Crossbow Expert or Sentinel/ PAM.
I’ve seen about 20 of the ones in the PHB used, I think. They may not all be equally good, but none of them are broken at least and a pretty big subset is certainly serviceable.
You have the right to that opinion, but I disagree.
When you can use a Bonus Action to completely offset a dramatic moment in the story, it is broken. Such as Shield Master being able to offset a Meteor Swarm from a big-bad you've been hunting down for 15 levels.
Feats in 5e are either "terribly broken" or "Useless compared to an ASI or other Feat"
I will never allow them at my tables because of that. And to double down on that opinion, I do not take them when I am playing in campaign, even if the DM allows them as an option.
Like Evasion does, only that doesn’t even require a reaction (not bonus action) to be used?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I would have advised your group not include Feats at all.
Battlemasters are super fun. And many of their maneuvers add the Superiority die to the damage. So you can really whack something hard.
I totally agree. Feats are the one major thing I hate about 5e. They are horribly unbalanced and I refuse to allow them at my tables, and I cringe when someone mentions them. No one says, "I'm taking the Actor feat" because the option is to always go Sharpshooter/ Crossbow Expert or Sentinel/ PAM.
I’ve seen about 20 of the ones in the PHB used, I think. They may not all be equally good, but none of them are broken at least and a pretty big subset is certainly serviceable.
You have the right to that opinion, but I disagree.
When you can use a Bonus Action to completely offset a dramatic moment in the story, it is broken. Such as Shield Master being able to offset a Meteor Swarm from a big-bad you've been hunting down for 15 levels.
Feats in 5e are either "terribly broken" or "Useless compared to an ASI or other Feat"
I will never allow them at my tables because of that. And to double down on that opinion, I do not take them when I am playing in campaign, even if the DM allows them as an option.
And I raise you one Wonder Woman blocking "Doomsday's" heat vision in BvS. I loathe that movie, but the example stands. Blocking, and even shrugging off, an attack from a BBEG can be incredibly dramatic.
I would have advised your group not include Feats at all.
Battlemasters are super fun. And many of their maneuvers add the Superiority die to the damage. So you can really whack something hard.
I totally agree. Feats are the one major thing I hate about 5e. They are horribly unbalanced and I refuse to allow them at my tables, and I cringe when someone mentions them. No one says, "I'm taking the Actor feat" because the option is to always go Sharpshooter/ Crossbow Expert or Sentinel/ PAM.
I’ve seen about 20 of the ones in the PHB used, I think. They may not all be equally good, but none of them are broken at least and a pretty big subset is certainly serviceable.
You have the right to that opinion, but I disagree.
When you can use a Bonus Action to completely offset a dramatic moment in the story, it is broken. Such as Shield Master being able to offset a Meteor Swarm from a big-bad you've been hunting down for 15 levels.
Feats in 5e are either "terribly broken" or "Useless compared to an ASI or other Feat"
I will never allow them at my tables because of that. And to double down on that opinion, I do not take them when I am playing in campaign, even if the DM allows them as an option.
And I raise you one Wonder Woman blocking "Doomsday's" heat vision in BvS. I loathe that movie, but the example stands. Blocking, and even shrugging off, an attack from a BBEG can be incredibly dramatic.
If I learned anything from being part of many different groups, it’s that what one group sees as a disappointing anticlimax another will look at from the opposite point of view and remember as an awesome, epic moment. A lot is in the delivery as well, and depends on the circumstances. “That was too easy” vs “that clutch success really saved our bacon, or we’d have been wiped out”.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Heya guys,
Starting a new campaign soon, the DM has nerfed some of the feats, locked some feats against races etc, so while not wanting to go through all the choices available etc, just wanted to maybe bounce a couple of thoughts off people more experienced about what I should do.
DM is a relatively new DM, and the other players (including myself) are fairly new, so I would like some more experienced opinions.
The battlemaster subclass seems very underwhelming to me, lack of bonus actions, the first 2 class features (student of war + know your enemy) adds to the story + theme but not the performance in battle, only 4 superiority dice (although recovers with short rests). Just seems like I will be losing lots of "opportunities" with missing bonus actions (compared to a paladin where a bonus action can be used very effectively for a range of other things). So I took a look at dual wielding.
Currently my character is optimised for DEX instead of STR, Since it can count towards armor, attack and initiative versus attack and maybe getting heavy armor.. And last campaign I found having more CON better than +1 or +2 higher AC.
Anyway, campaign only goes to ~lv.11, no need to worry about anything higher than that.
- TWF with the dual wielding fighting style would make it 2 attacks at low level, D6 dice for both, making AC =16, 2 attacks with D6 + dex + prof. At higher levels, it would be 3 or 4 attacks (so just 1 more attack as a bonus action), and if not I can still use a superiority dice and use a bonus action to add a D10 to an attack etc (depending on the maneuver). With an action serge I'd get 1 more attack making 4 attacks total possible at lv.11 .. Good bonus through whole campaign from what I can see.
- Alternatively 1 weapon + shield would be D8, 1 less attack.. AC = 18 (+2 shield). Meaning 1 attack at low level, 3 attacks at level 11.. slightly less damage taken (about 10%?) but seems like doing less damage overall so I'll be in close combat for longer wouldn't I?
I've heard it said that an additional attack is generally preferred (over advantage) since you have the possibility of 2 attacks - surely the same applies to TWF vs weapon+shield?
So I guess the questions here are:
in what scenarios would you pick one over the other?
are there any shortfalls I may have missed (other than having to wait 1 turn to draw the second weapon for 'free')?
Themeatically both work with the character I'm building, so there's no big drive either way from role playing.
Thanks for any comments.
--
old486whizz
If you take the dual wielder feat, you can get +1 AC when dual wielding (17 AC) and then you can also use rapiers so you would be able to do 2d8 damage + modifiers instead of 2d6. You could take variant human to get the feat at level 1 if you wanted or just wait till level 4 and take the feat then.
Dual wielding is, imo, sub-par. The feat makes it more bearable, but its still not ideal. It can help if you're a rogue, since it gives you a second chance to trigger a sneak attack, or a pally getting another chance to smite (though pallys don't get the fighting style), but what it works best for is a vehicle for delivering damage granted by some other ability. And don't forget dueling style gives you a +2 to damage on every hit, which can help mitigate the lost damage from an off hand attack.
But the bigger issue (which gets at your scenarios question) is your role in the party. Will you be tanking? Will others be tanking with you? If you're the only one, you really want that shield. If there are other front liners, you might not need it as much, but still it would be good. If you're not tanking much at all, then that can give you other options. And honestly, if you aren't going sword-and-board and are just looking to do damage, you're better off with a glaive or halberd and great weapon fighting style and polearm master/great weapon master feat combo (maybe with sentinel thrown in).
Dex builds are good and can be quite viable, so there's no problem there. You give up a point of AC (at 20 dex, more if you don't max it out) but you get a lot of other dex-related goodies, so the trade-off can be worth it. (and as smftre notes, the feat can make up that one AC point) However, if you do end up with a polearm, you'll want to go str based.
Battlemasters are generally very well regarded (never played one myself, so I'm just going by what I hear). Most fights only last 4-5 rounds, so four die will get you through a lot. And if there's a warlock in the party, they'll also want lots of short rests, and a few other classes will as well. Battlemasters aren't designed to do lots of damage, which seems like what you're focusing on. They're battlefield control, so you need to have a feel for which maneuver to do and when (knocking someone prone isn't just about giving you advantage, it's about giving the rogue advantage for their sneak attack, for example). They can take a bit more strategy to play effectively. (As an aside, they can be really cool with a dex build, since many of the maneuvers key of weapon attacks, not melee attacks, so you can still trigger them with ranged weapons. And as a dex character, you'll be very good with ranged. Battlemaster archers can actually work very well.)
Also, action surge is better than you're giving it credit for. When you take the attack action as a level 11 fighter, you get 3 attacks. When you action surge, you take the attack action again, meaning 3 more attacks (Not just 1. You get the full benefit of taking the attack action). if you're two-weapon, you can add in another, single attack for 7 total attacks at level 11.
I am personally partial to Rapier and Whip myself. The damage output is a teenytiny bit lower, but the options available with the 10-foot reach are a strong compensation IMHO.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Battle Masters are amazing. Truly. My personal preference is a Dex build taking Archery Fighting Style. The sheer amount of pain you can deliver with that is incredible.
Honestly, IMHO, if you want to make the most out of Superiority Dice, either ranged or reach weapons will do you better. The ability to use the right maneuver on the right target at the right time is incomparable. So, if you want to do the melee thing I would recommend Great Weapon Fighting and go for a reach weapon. (Either that or accept the lower damage due and use a whip.)
FYI: When you Action Surge it isn’t “1 Attack,” it’s an entire other action. So if you decide to use it for the Attack action, at 11th level that’s an entire additional 3 attacks. But honestly, don’t think it has to be the Attack Action, there are a lot of things you can do with an action.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I would have advised your group not include Feats at all.
Battlemasters are super fun. And many of their maneuvers add the Superiority die to the damage. So you can really whack something hard.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Yeah, unfortunately some of the feats are nerfed for being overpowered, and a couple aren't in the race I want - so no access to great weapon master, polearm, or dual wield feats (otherwise I would have deffo gone single+shield and not had a second thought).
Thanks for correcting me on my misinterpretation of the "extra attack" + "second wind".. Didn't realise they worked that well together and doubled the attacks... If that's the case I assume I did Paladin wrong last time when I cast haste (extra action and extra attack should have been 4 attacks instead of 3?).
Although not concentrating on damage, I obviously did think battlefighter would be doing more melee and physical damage (not as much as barbarian).
I've been in fights where there's a few rounds TBH (few bad rolls, number of enemies and just high HP of enemies vs our damage), another reason for the semi-optimisation (I don't want to find out I crippled myself by halfing the damage I could have been doing and cause the team to struggle).
And yes, also thanks about the maneuvers suggestions about the tactical side of things, I can definitely see the benefit of using commanders strike when I get 3 attacks, I will consider the others more depending on the battlefields we come across (closer areas may allow me to use them to good effect for the team).
In our previous campaign we did use some feats - but not many. This one we are all getting one from the restricted set we have access to off the bat, making variant humans irrelevant.
Regarding my role in the party:
I knew 1 other would be a bard, I am playing her "protector" as a fighter. After this was mostly worked out I've found out there will be 2 other front liners (Monk and Barbarian) with a possible 5th joining. So I was going to be mid-to-front, didn't really want a ranged character (the damage was always just so low in the last game) - but might be more fitting for the party... I'll mull that over too.
EDIT: Thank you all so much for your comments.
--
old486whizz
No, haste specifically only gives 1 Attack.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
You could try being a full caster.
Forge Clerics are a good transition class from fighter to caster.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
I totally agree.
Feats are the one major thing I hate about 5e. They are horribly unbalanced and I refuse to allow them at my tables, and I cringe when someone mentions them. No one says, "I'm taking the Actor feat" because the option is to always go Sharpshooter/ Crossbow Expert or Sentinel/ PAM.
Duel wielding pays off at lower levels, but tapers off in usefulness hard over time. You are investing a fighting style, less ac, and a feat into it too, which is a lot.
A sword and board battlemaster dex fighter isn't something to sneeze at. If you can get enough short rests, you can pretend your rapier is better than a long sword in terms of damage. And all the maneuvers with control features just help to increase the damage you and your allies can do, while limiting what enemies are capable of doing. Battlemaster is basically the strongest fighter subclass.
And this frees up that feat you would have put into TWF. You can get another martial dice (which I think you can do multiple times), or pick up Hex or Blessing from magic initiate, or Alert, or a myriad of UA feats that would be fun if your DM allows it.
Two-Weapon Fighting starts off strong, but it pretty much breaks even with Extra Attack. And with every additional attack with a bigger weapon, it falls further behind. It really shines when you have extra dice to roll, like with the ranger's hunter's mark. And the only way to get that is by multiclassing, so we'll forget it for now.
The big question here is which sounds better? It's +1 AC vs an extra 1d8 weapon. That said, it also requires your bonus action, which some maneuvers compete with. So, if you decide to embrace TWF, you'll be eliminating some manevers. By the same token, you give yourself one more chance to hit and use a maneuver.
I’ve seen about 20 of the ones in the PHB used, I think. They may not all be equally good, but none of them are broken at least and a pretty big subset is certainly serviceable.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
More importantly, they are fun.
as someone who's traditionally loved dual wield characters since early 2e, in 5e DW is really a sub-par system.
EDIT for clarity
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
You have the right to that opinion, but I disagree.
When you can use a Bonus Action to completely offset a dramatic moment in the story, it is broken. Such as Shield Master being able to offset a Meteor Swarm from a big-bad you've been hunting down for 15 levels.
Feats in 5e are either "terribly broken" or "Useless compared to an ASI or other Feat"
I will never allow them at my tables because of that. And to double down on that opinion, I do not take them when I am playing in campaign, even if the DM allows them as an option.
If you can’t take the dual wield feat, then sword and board is definitely the way to go.
And if you’re a protector, sentinel is a great feat, and look at cavalier, they’re very good at forcing people to attack them and at protecting others.
Like Evasion does, only that doesn’t even require a reaction (not bonus action) to be used?
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
And I raise you one Wonder Woman blocking "Doomsday's" heat vision in BvS. I loathe that movie, but the example stands. Blocking, and even shrugging off, an attack from a BBEG can be incredibly dramatic.
If I learned anything from being part of many different groups, it’s that what one group sees as a disappointing anticlimax another will look at from the opposite point of view and remember as an awesome, epic moment. A lot is in the delivery as well, and depends on the circumstances. “That was too easy” vs “that clutch success really saved our bacon, or we’d have been wiped out”.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].