I just want to make sure I'm understanding this correctly, because through the last couple years of playing DnD 5th edition, this is really frustrating. Two weapon fighting is stated as:
"When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative. If either weapon has the thrown property, you can throw the weapon, instead of making a melee attack with it."
So because I don't get to add my modifier to the damage roll, if my level 20 assassin is dual wielding daggers and hits with both attacks, I could do upwards of 200 damage for the first hit, and then literally 1 damage for the second hit? Either that's not how that works or it is how it works and I'm not building optimally, because that seems insane to me. It feels like my first attack is ripping my dagger through their entire body, and my second one gives them a paper cut
In that case, it does not seem a fair comparison for the two attacks. You can indeed attack with the off-hand weapon first, and include there Sneak attack, then with the primary weapon. The imbalance due to Sneak attack remains.
Indeed I was including sneak attack and death strike. It's just that if I hit with both attacks, this is a pretty usual spread. I do awesome damage for the first attack. And then literally 1-4 with the second. At a high level, it seems so negligible that it feels like I shouldn't bother if I hit with my first one. But if there is no need to use cunning action, is my turn just going to be limited to attack and pass? I just wasn't sure if there was some way to beef up the second attack so it at least means something. Is multi classing into fighter the only way?
So because I don't get to add my modifier to the damage roll, if my level 20 assassin is dual wielding daggers and hits with both attacks, I could do upwards of 200 damage for the first hit, and then literally 1 damage for the second hit? Either that's not how that works or it is how it works and I'm not building optimally, because that seems insane to me.
Suppose you miss with your Attack action. Without two-weapon fighting, that's 200 damage down the drain. With two-weapon fighting, that's a second chance at 195 damage.
So because I don't get to add my modifier to the damage roll, if my level 20 assassin is dual wielding daggers and hits with both attacks, I could do upwards of 200 damage for the first hit, and then literally 1 damage for the second hit? Either that's not how that works or it is how it works and I'm not building optimally, because that seems insane to me.
Suppose you miss with your Attack action. Without two-weapon fighting, that's 200 damage down the drain. With two-weapon fighting, that's a second chance at 195 damage.
Yeah I get that. It's definitely a good second chance if I miss. If I do hit with the first one though, I was just making sure I was reading things correctly. It's hard for me to understand rp wise because like I said, I feel like I'm paper cutting them with the second hit
Yeah I get that. It's definitely a good second chance if I miss. If I do hit with the first one though, I was just making sure I was reading things correctly. It's hard for me to understand rp wise because like I said, I feel like I'm paper cutting them with the second hit
Yup. That's just the way rogues work. Fighters, Rangers, and College of Blades Bards can add their ability modifier to the bonus attack with the Fighting Style class feature. If your DM allows multiclassing and you could get it with 1 Fighter level.
There's nothing you have misunderstood about two weapon fighting. There are ways to get a little bit more out of it (the feat Dual Wielder comes to mind, and the Fighting Style "Two Weapon Fighting" that some classes get), but that's about it.
So, while some classes can be built around the damage of one additional attack for standard damage output (such as a fighter or a ranger), InquisitiveCoder's suggestion shows the typical usefulness for a rogue: If the first attack misses, you get another chance. For a character that only gets one attack normally, and has such a stupendous damage output under the right circumstances, it's a very good idea to have the option of a second attempt.
If the first one hits, you usually have better things to do with your bonus action (disengage, hide, that kind of stuff that rogues can do better than most. :p )
So it sounds like if I do hit with my first attack and get the sneak attack off. I should just find something better to do with my bonus action. Thanks for the discussion :)
I just want to make sure I'm understanding this correctly, because through the last couple years of playing DnD 5th edition, this is really frustrating. Two weapon fighting is stated as:
"When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative. If either weapon has the thrown property, you can throw the weapon, instead of making a melee attack with it."
So because I don't get to add my modifier to the damage roll, if my level 20 assassin is dual wielding daggers and hits with both attacks, I could do upwards of 200 damage for the first hit, and then literally 1 damage for the second hit? Either that's not how that works or it is how it works and I'm not building optimally, because that seems insane to me. It feels like my first attack is ripping my dagger through their entire body, and my second one gives them a paper cut
But if you missed with your first attack the second attack would give you a second chance to do "200 damage".
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The lack of inflection in text means that a reader of any post adds their own inflection as they "verbalize" it in their head. I write long and repetitive in an effort to be clear and avoid my intent from being skewed or inverted. I am also bad at examples. It is common for people to skim my posts pull out the idea they think I mean or want to argue against or focus on my bad example instead of the point I am actually trying to make. I apologies for the confusion my failure to be clear and concise creates.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I just want to make sure I'm understanding this correctly, because through the last couple years of playing DnD 5th edition, this is really frustrating. Two weapon fighting is stated as:
"When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative. If either weapon has the thrown property, you can throw the weapon, instead of making a melee attack with it."
So because I don't get to add my modifier to the damage roll, if my level 20 assassin is dual wielding daggers and hits with both attacks, I could do upwards of 200 damage for the first hit, and then literally 1 damage for the second hit? Either that's not how that works or it is how it works and I'm not building optimally, because that seems insane to me. It feels like my first attack is ripping my dagger through their entire body, and my second one gives them a paper cut
Does the 200 damage include Sneak attack?
In that case, it does not seem a fair comparison for the two attacks. You can indeed attack with the off-hand weapon first, and include there Sneak attack, then with the primary weapon. The imbalance due to Sneak attack remains.
Indeed I was including sneak attack and death strike. It's just that if I hit with both attacks, this is a pretty usual spread. I do awesome damage for the first attack. And then literally 1-4 with the second. At a high level, it seems so negligible that it feels like I shouldn't bother if I hit with my first one. But if there is no need to use cunning action, is my turn just going to be limited to attack and pass? I just wasn't sure if there was some way to beef up the second attack so it at least means something. Is multi classing into fighter the only way?
The Forum Infestation (TM)
The Forum Infestation (TM)
There's nothing you have misunderstood about two weapon fighting. There are ways to get a little bit more out of it (the feat Dual Wielder comes to mind, and the Fighting Style "Two Weapon Fighting" that some classes get), but that's about it.
So, while some classes can be built around the damage of one additional attack for standard damage output (such as a fighter or a ranger), InquisitiveCoder's suggestion shows the typical usefulness for a rogue: If the first attack misses, you get another chance. For a character that only gets one attack normally, and has such a stupendous damage output under the right circumstances, it's a very good idea to have the option of a second attempt.
If the first one hits, you usually have better things to do with your bonus action (disengage, hide, that kind of stuff that rogues can do better than most. :p )
So it sounds like if I do hit with my first attack and get the sneak attack off. I should just find something better to do with my bonus action. Thanks for the discussion :)
But if you missed with your first attack the second attack would give you a second chance to do "200 damage".
The lack of inflection in text means that a reader of any post adds their own inflection as they "verbalize" it in their head. I write long and repetitive in an effort to be clear and avoid my intent from being skewed or inverted. I am also bad at examples. It is common for people to skim my posts pull out the idea they think I mean or want to argue against or focus on my bad example instead of the point I am actually trying to make. I apologies for the confusion my failure to be clear and concise creates.