With a 2024 paladin, I would go two-weapon fighting style, with scimitar and shortsword for Nick and Vex but not take Dual Wielder to free up bonus action for smite, divine favour or hunters mark. Unless I’m missing something, I think that should net the best damage.
With a 2024 paladin, I would go two-weapon fighting style, with scimitar and shortsword for Nick and Vex but not take Dual Wielder to free up bonus action for smite, divine favour or hunters mark. Unless I’m missing something, I think that should net the best damage.
Just to be clear, this is about the best damage you can get with two weapons for Paladin, it is not the best damage you can get for Paladin, it'll still fall behind a PAM+GWM Paladin around levels 9~11
That's a good caveat. Taking GWM and a greatsword could put you on par (or just above) with TWF once you get to an extra attack at Lvl 5. At that stage it's more a question of your play style and how you like your chances of scoring a hit. With more attacks/round, your chances of hitting and hence smiting is better; but if you're playing a Vengeance paladin with a Vow of Enmity in play, you'll be attacking with advantage so might be worth the risk. Though with a TWF paladin using at least one finesse weapon, you can pick up Defensive Duelist for some AC.
It's actually more that with PAM, you take Halberd and either Pike or Glaive. If you go into battle against multiple creatures, you pull out a Halberd and do more attacks per round than is possible with with TWF due to cleave (as you can cleave once per turn), or you get as many with Pike by pushing creatures out of your range so they have to re-enter triggering a reaction (doesn't work so well against ranged enemies or mages) or you take Glaive, so you still do some damage if you miss.
This is before considering other advantages, like the additional range allows you more options in positioning and Pike makes you a far more effective zone/tank character as you can better control where hostile creatures go.
At level 8 TWF (shortsword+scimitar) does 3*((1d6+1d4)*.7)+(4+1)*.65) = ~22.35 damage (Adv. 30.7125)
At level 8 PAM (Pike) does 2*((1d10+1d4)*.7+(4+3+1)*.65) = 22.02 ~ damage (Adv. 30.225)
PAM (Glaive) does 2*((1d10+1d4)*.7+(3+1)*.65+4) = ~24.82 (Adv. 31.205)
PAM (Halberd) does 3*((1d10+1d4)*.7)+.65)+2*(4+3)*.65 = ~28.48 (Adv vs 1. ~36.685, Adv vs both 39.195)
This is all assuming Divine Favor, assuming a +1 weapon, and the relevant fighting style (two weapon fighting or great weapon fighting). This also ignores how much more damage PAM does on reactions and that PAM gets more reactions (Vengeance already gets a lot but PAM gives even more reactions on top of doing more damage).
Admittedly, at level 9, PB goes to +4 and Spirit Shroud becomes available, this would push TWF to ~26.55, Pike ~26.12, Glaive ~28.92, Halberd ~33.98. you can also for PAM, instead of taking GWF, take Defense to start with a +1AC from the get go, GWF really doesn't add much damage, it moves a ~4.5 average weapon die to a ~4.8.
I'm not telling people to NOT do TWF, I just think too many people are jumping on the bandwagon of thinking that Paladin with TWF does the most damage when in fact, it does not. PAM+GWM still does the most damage, on top of offering more utility too top it off. The only issue with PAM+GWM is that it takes longer to come online compared to TWF. Prior to PAM, it's best to use a greatsword+greataxe combo for GWM which still does comparable damage to TWF.
How would a TWF stack up with feat support, specifically Dual Wielder, for the extra bonus action attack in conjunction with the Vex weapon mastery?
Dual Wielder is not really worth it, since Paladin has a lot to do with their bonus action already. Imagine a 4 round combat at level 5, Paladin might do the following
Round 2-4: Action - Attack + Attack + LW Attack, Bonus action: if crit then smite, if low HP then lay on hands, else wise cast BA spell or attack with Dual Wielder
you're lucky if it adds 2 attacks per encounter and as you get higher level you'll get more things to do with the bonus action. Assuming you have a 60% chance to hit, your chance to get a critical each round would be almost 20% which is a fairly good chance to critical and thus use a smite.
believe this formula is correct: 0.05+(0.55*0.0975+0.4*0.05)+((0.55×(0.84−0.0975)+0.4*0.55)*0.0975+(0.55*0.16+0.4*0.4)*0.05). Assumption is Vex weapon attack, Vex weapon attack, Nick weapon attack.
If you have a higher chance to hit then you get even more likely to critical, for example a devotion paladin with +2 CHA modifier then it would increase too around a 23.3% chance when using sacred weapon: 0.05+(0.65*0.0975+0.3*0.05)+((0.65×(0.91−0.0975)+0.3*0.65)*0.0975+(0.665*0.9+0.3*0.3)*0.05) since you're now working at a 70% chance to hit.
If you're oath of vengeance, Vex does little for you, and you'd have a ~28.2% chance to critical each round with vow of enmity (0.0975+(1−0.0975)×0.0975+(1−0.0975×0.0975)×0.0975).
Meanwhile if you get low HP (and you are 2AC less then a shield build), then you need to use lay on hands to keep HP up, or if an enemy gets past you, you might want to cast compelled duel to help save the wizard, or shield of faith if somebody else is under attack.
So the question is, is it worth taking a feat to get maybe 2 additional attacks per combat, I'd say no personally. Defensive Duellist is a better option for level 4, at level 8 you might want to consider resilient (constitution) or war caster(charisma) to help keep up Spirit Shroud from level 9+, at level 12 you then still got good options with Charger, Slasher, Piercer, Mage Slayer or Sentinel, all of which I would say are better than Dual Wielder, same for levels 16 and 19 but 19 also gives epic boons.
Theoretically you need Dual Wielder for the highest possible DPR but in practice it's not the best choice for a campaign worthy character, you're still a front liner paladin and need some tankiness too you and there are other feats which more reliably give damage when considering the high crit rate and not requiring a bonus action.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
With a 2024 paladin, I would go two-weapon fighting style, with scimitar and shortsword for Nick and Vex but not take Dual Wielder to free up bonus action for smite, divine favour or hunters mark. Unless I’m missing something, I think that should net the best damage.
Ok thanks!
i guess I’ll go for a dexterity build and max that out followed by constitution and put the rest into charisma.
Just to be clear, this is about the best damage you can get with two weapons for Paladin, it is not the best damage you can get for Paladin, it'll still fall behind a PAM+GWM Paladin around levels 9~11
That's a good caveat. Taking GWM and a greatsword could put you on par (or just above) with TWF once you get to an extra attack at Lvl 5. At that stage it's more a question of your play style and how you like your chances of scoring a hit. With more attacks/round, your chances of hitting and hence smiting is better; but if you're playing a Vengeance paladin with a Vow of Enmity in play, you'll be attacking with advantage so might be worth the risk. Though with a TWF paladin using at least one finesse weapon, you can pick up Defensive Duelist for some AC.
It's actually more that with PAM, you take Halberd and either Pike or Glaive. If you go into battle against multiple creatures, you pull out a Halberd and do more attacks per round than is possible with with TWF due to cleave (as you can cleave once per turn), or you get as many with Pike by pushing creatures out of your range so they have to re-enter triggering a reaction (doesn't work so well against ranged enemies or mages) or you take Glaive, so you still do some damage if you miss.
This is before considering other advantages, like the additional range allows you more options in positioning and Pike makes you a far more effective zone/tank character as you can better control where hostile creatures go.
At level 8 TWF (shortsword+scimitar) does 3*((1d6+1d4)*.7)+(4+1)*.65) = ~22.35 damage (Adv. 30.7125)
At level 8 PAM (Pike) does 2*((1d10+1d4)*.7+(4+3+1)*.65) = 22.02 ~ damage (Adv. 30.225)
PAM (Glaive) does 2*((1d10+1d4)*.7+(3+1)*.65+4) = ~24.82 (Adv. 31.205)
PAM (Halberd) does 3*((1d10+1d4)*.7)+.65)+2*(4+3)*.65 = ~28.48 (Adv vs 1. ~36.685, Adv vs both 39.195)
This is all assuming Divine Favor, assuming a +1 weapon, and the relevant fighting style (two weapon fighting or great weapon fighting). This also ignores how much more damage PAM does on reactions and that PAM gets more reactions (Vengeance already gets a lot but PAM gives even more reactions on top of doing more damage).
Admittedly, at level 9, PB goes to +4 and Spirit Shroud becomes available, this would push TWF to ~26.55, Pike ~26.12, Glaive ~28.92, Halberd ~33.98. you can also for PAM, instead of taking GWF, take Defense to start with a +1AC from the get go, GWF really doesn't add much damage, it moves a ~4.5 average weapon die to a ~4.8.
I'm not telling people to NOT do TWF, I just think too many people are jumping on the bandwagon of thinking that Paladin with TWF does the most damage when in fact, it does not. PAM+GWM still does the most damage, on top of offering more utility too top it off. The only issue with PAM+GWM is that it takes longer to come online compared to TWF. Prior to PAM, it's best to use a greatsword+greataxe combo for GWM which still does comparable damage to TWF.
They pretty much killed the Hexadin by gating subclasses behind level 3.
How would a TWF stack up with feat support, specifically Dual Wielder, for the extra bonus action attack in conjunction with the Vex weapon mastery?
Dual Wielder is not really worth it, since Paladin has a lot to do with their bonus action already. Imagine a 4 round combat at level 5, Paladin might do the following
Round 1: Bonus Action, Divine Favor, Action - Attack + Attack + LW Attack
Round 2-4: Action - Attack + Attack + LW Attack, Bonus action: if crit then smite, if low HP then lay on hands, else wise cast BA spell or attack with Dual Wielder
you're lucky if it adds 2 attacks per encounter and as you get higher level you'll get more things to do with the bonus action. Assuming you have a 60% chance to hit, your chance to get a critical each round would be almost 20% which is a fairly good chance to critical and thus use a smite.
believe this formula is correct: 0.05+(0.55*0.0975+0.4*0.05)+((0.55×(0.84−0.0975)+0.4*0.55)*0.0975+(0.55*0.16+0.4*0.4)*0.05). Assumption is Vex weapon attack, Vex weapon attack, Nick weapon attack.
If you have a higher chance to hit then you get even more likely to critical, for example a devotion paladin with +2 CHA modifier then it would increase too around a 23.3% chance when using sacred weapon: 0.05+(0.65*0.0975+0.3*0.05)+((0.65×(0.91−0.0975)+0.3*0.65)*0.0975+(0.665*0.9+0.3*0.3)*0.05) since you're now working at a 70% chance to hit.
If you're oath of vengeance, Vex does little for you, and you'd have a ~28.2% chance to critical each round with vow of enmity (0.0975+(1−0.0975)×0.0975+(1−0.0975×0.0975)×0.0975).
Meanwhile if you get low HP (and you are 2AC less then a shield build), then you need to use lay on hands to keep HP up, or if an enemy gets past you, you might want to cast compelled duel to help save the wizard, or shield of faith if somebody else is under attack.
So the question is, is it worth taking a feat to get maybe 2 additional attacks per combat, I'd say no personally. Defensive Duellist is a better option for level 4, at level 8 you might want to consider resilient (constitution) or war caster(charisma) to help keep up Spirit Shroud from level 9+, at level 12 you then still got good options with Charger, Slasher, Piercer, Mage Slayer or Sentinel, all of which I would say are better than Dual Wielder, same for levels 16 and 19 but 19 also gives epic boons.
Theoretically you need Dual Wielder for the highest possible DPR but in practice it's not the best choice for a campaign worthy character, you're still a front liner paladin and need some tankiness too you and there are other feats which more reliably give damage when considering the high crit rate and not requiring a bonus action.