Doesn't damage suffer from the same diminishing returns as creatures gain HP as the levels increase? Both AC and Damage tend to hit plateaus (such as Fighters at lvl 10 are often doing the same at level 9, but then the third attack at 11 causes a big jump)
It has diminishing effects as your base damage increases, not as monster hp increase.
If i would design a feat for Duwal wielder it would look something like this.
Your two-weapon mastery allows you to unleash a series of deadly blows on your opponent and use your weapons for parries.
While wielding 2 weapons and hit a target you add 2 damage to your damage role for each time you hit the same target in this turn before
While wielding 2 weapons and another creature hits you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction to add your dexterity-modifier + your proficiency bonus to your AC for that attack, potentially causing the attack to miss you. You can use this reaction additional to an attack of opportunity.
This would be an attempt to make the feat "as good" as GWM or SS.
To the first point. This makes especially fighters able to pull of an awesome turn combined with actionsurge. It's still limited in use, but can be devastating an lead to really cool situations. Additionally other dualwielder are are now maybe even a considerable target for spells like haste and will profit more from advantage too, but in a different way. So they can add up the damage but will never reach the mastery of a true fighter here (wich should often be the case anyway).
To the second point. I really like the feat defensive duelist, but in all honesty it's not good enoug compared to A LOT of other feats like Slasher/piercer/crusher/SS/GWM or something like that. So i tried to find a way to make this AC-Buff against a SIngle hit worthwhile for taking a feat. In my opinion it is needed, that this reaction could be made additionaly to an attack of opportunity. In this way it doesn't feel like a too taxing tradeoff (the trade-off that is already been made is the taken feat). Additionaly since it only protects against a single attack the AC-bonus should be higher. In my approach the Dualwielder stays a clear dex-build so his AC will be lower as his strength based counterparts, so a higher buff will make a lot of sense. Additionally the player using this special reaction to one time dodge an attack that would even hit the tank will feel pretty awesome and rewarded for the feat but will not be protected against further attacks.
I didn't calculated it all down and as always things like these need to be playtested. Maybe the parry needs to be tuned down back again to defensive duelist.
If i would design a feat for Duwal wielder it would look something like this.
Your two-weapon mastery allows you to unleash a series of deadly blows on your opponent and use your weapons for parries.
While wielding 2 weapons and hit a target you add 2 damage to your damage role for each time you hit the same target in this turn before
While wielding 2 weapons and another creature hits you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction to add your dexterity-modifier + your proficiency bonus to your AC for that attack, potentially causing the attack to miss you. You can use this reaction additional to an attack of opportunity.
This would be an attempt to make the feat "as good" as GWM or SS.
To the first point. This makes especially fighters able to pull of an awesome turn combined with actionsurge. It's still limited in use, but can be devastating an lead to really cool situations. Additionally other dualwielder are are now maybe even a considerable target for spells like haste and will profit more from advantage too, but in a different way. So they can add up the damage but will never reach the mastery of a true fighter here (wich should often be the case anyway).
To the second point. I really like the feat defensive duelist, but in all honesty it's not good enoug compared to A LOT of other feats like Slasher/piercer/crusher/SS/GWM or something like that. So i tried to find a way to make this AC-Buff against a SIngle hit worthwhile for taking a feat. In my opinion it is needed, that this reaction could be made additionaly to an attack of opportunity. In this way it doesn't feel like a too taxing tradeoff (the trade-off that is already been made is the taken feat). Additionaly since it only protects against a single attack the AC-bonus should be higher. In my approach the Dualwielder stays a clear dex-build so his AC will be lower as his strength based counterparts, so a higher buff will make a lot of sense. Additionally the player using this special reaction to one time dodge an attack that would even hit the tank will feel pretty awesome and rewarded for the feat but will not be protected against further attacks.
I didn't calculated it all down and as always things like these need to be playtested. Maybe the parry needs to be tuned down back again to defensive duelist.
I would alter this to be Dex OR Str modifier so as to not diss the Str-centric characters but otherwise, this is pretty good.
The fact that Reserved Action even eliminated off-hand attacks means that almost everything involving two-handed fighting in this game needs a balance pass. Not everyone WANTS to be the huge Barb with the great ax.
I am looking at revising the Dual Wielder feat to be where a character receives a number of off hand attacks equal to half their proficiency bonus rounded up. Now the number of off hand attacks cannot exceed the number of mainhand attacks. WIth this the DW fighter at 20 has 4 mainhand and 3 offhand attacks. This brings the DPR closer in line to GWM and Sharpshooter builds.
They only are where this may cause issue is in conjunction with multiple abilities that can add additional damage per strike. Again, this is really only an issue with high level fighter as this will quickly add up.
I am looking at revising the Dual Wielder feat to be where a character receives a number of off hand attacks equal to half their proficiency bonus rounded up. Now the number of off hand attacks cannot exceed the number of mainhand attacks. WIth this the DW fighter at 20 has 4 mainhand and 3 offhand attacks. This brings the DPR closer in line to GWM and Sharpshooter builds.
They only are where this may cause issue is in conjunction with multiple abilities that can add additional damage per strike. Again, this is really only an issue with high level fighter as this will quickly add up.
I like this approach. I don't really worry about what the characters can do at lvl 20 because most games never make it that far. By lvl 20 full casters can summon meteors and cause earthquakes. I'm not really worried if the TW fighter can do 10-15 more damage.
I am looking at revising the Dual Wielder feat to be where a character receives a number of off hand attacks equal to half their proficiency bonus rounded up. Now the number of off hand attacks cannot exceed the number of mainhand attacks. WIth this the DW fighter at 20 has 4 mainhand and 3 offhand attacks. This brings the DPR closer in line to GWM and Sharpshooter builds.
They only are where this may cause issue is in conjunction with multiple abilities that can add additional damage per strike. Again, this is really only an issue with high level fighter as this will quickly add up.
Does it still cost a bonus action?
An extra attack is itself valuable, since it's another chance to hit on your turn. Once you factor in probability of a hit, (and to crit), it's worth more than just adding damage on one attack. (And this will make things like Hex/Hunter's mark more valuable too, and it skews the effect of advantage, and minimizes disadvantage).
I'm not saying Dual Wielding is fine, mind you. But as others point out, it's mainly because GWM and SS combine with other feats that also give a bonus action attack (PAM and XbowX), which means that the -5 to hit for using those feats is ameliorated by another chance to hit in a turn. This means DW suffers by comparison. The DW feat doesn't do enough to compensate, because the bonus from using heavier weapons equates to about +1 per attack. The +1 AC is nice, but not enough.
I wonder if the balance of a flat +1/2Prof attacks is enough, or if we need to consider something like the -5 to activate it that GWM/SS uses? for example:
When you use two-weapon fighting, you can choose to attack more than once with the off-hand weapon with your bonus action. You can make as many attacks as you made with you attack action, up to a half your proficiency bonus (round up), but each attack takes a -5 penalty to hit.
I am looking at revising the Dual Wielder feat to be where a character receives a number of off hand attacks equal to half their proficiency bonus rounded up. Now the number of off hand attacks cannot exceed the number of mainhand attacks. WIth this the DW fighter at 20 has 4 mainhand and 3 offhand attacks. This brings the DPR closer in line to GWM and Sharpshooter builds.
They only are where this may cause issue is in conjunction with multiple abilities that can add additional damage per strike. Again, this is really only an issue with high level fighter as this will quickly add up.
Does it still cost a bonus action?
An extra attack is itself valuable, since it's another chance to hit on your turn. Once you factor in probability of a hit, (and to crit), it's worth more than just adding damage on one attack. (And this will make things like Hex/Hunter's mark more valuable too, and it skews the effect of advantage, and minimizes disadvantage).
I'm not saying Dual Wielding is fine, mind you. But as others point out, it's mainly because GWM and SS combine with other feats that also give a bonus action attack (PAM and XbowX), which means that the -5 to hit for using those feats is ameliorated by another chance to hit in a turn. This means DW suffers by comparison. The DW feat doesn't do enough to compensate, because the bonus from using heavier weapons equates to about +1 per attack. The +1 AC is nice, but not enough.
I wonder if the balance of a flat +1/2Prof attacks is enough, or if we need to consider something like the -5 to activate it that GWM/SS uses? for example:
When you use two-weapon fighting, you can choose to attack more than once with the off-hand weapon with your bonus action. You can make as many attacks as you made with you attack action, up to a half your proficiency bonus (round up), but each attack takes a -5 penalty to hit.
I wonder if that math checks out.
Unfortunately, this is one of those things that works at the high end but not the low end.
Say we do it your way and the character is a lvl 5 Fighter with TWF fighting style. At level 5 they have +3 PB and 2 Attacks so they would get 2 more attacks at -5 to hit. Depending on the AC of the target, this has a high chance of missing, whereas if they simply attack one with the off-hand (the way it works now), they have less potential damage but a much higher chance of hitting.
However, a lvl 11 character presumably has +5 to hit from their applicable stat plus 4 for their PB. They can make 3 attacks base plus the same 2 with the off-hand but now their chance to hit a typical foe is higher. This makes the gamble more worth it because of potentially the same payoff with less risk.
I don't think that a flat -5 to hit is the answer but I do think that tying it to the PB or perhaps the base number of Attacks might be the way to start.
I will attempt to run some numbers and add them to the conversation if possible.
An extra attack is itself valuable, since it's another chance to hit on your turn. Once you factor in probability of a hit, (and to crit), it's worth more than just adding damage on one attack. (And this will make things like Hex/Hunter's mark more valuable too, and it skews the effect of advantage, and minimizes disadvantage).
Number of hits only matters for per-hit effects like the ones you pointed out. If the hit rate is the same, there's no difference in expected value between 1 attack that deals 2d6 + 6 or 2 attacks that deal 1d6 + 3 each, regardless of advantage or disadvantage. You're just rolling more d20s, which is slower.
More attacks only make a difference when there's per-hit effects or effects that rely on hitting at least once during your turn (e.g. Sneak Attack). The more attacks you the more you slow the game down and add the more you risk a game-breaking combination involving a strong per-hit damage bonus.
But as others point out, it's mainly because GWM and SS combine with other feats that also give a bonus action attack (PAM and XbowX), which means that the -5 to hit for using those feats is ameliorated by another chance to hit in a turn.
Whether the -5/+10 is a good trade is completely independent of how many attacks you can make; it only depends on your hit rate and your damage. The bonus attacks from PAM and CE are a problem because 1) the damage from the extra attack far outweighs the reduction in your weapon's damage dice, and 2) it gives you another attack to apply per-hit bonuses to (which the +10 damage is). But if the -5 penalty outweighs the +10 damage, you're going to be losing damage on every hit and attacking more times isn't going to make that trade any better...you're just taking a loss more times.
This means DW suffers by comparison. The DW feat doesn't do enough to compensate, because the bonus from using heavier weapons equates to about +1 per attack. The +1 AC is nice, but not enough.
I wonder if the balance of a flat +1/2Prof attacks is enough, or if we need to consider something like the -5 to activate it that GWM/SS uses? for example:
When you use two-weapon fighting, you can choose to attack more than once with the off-hand weapon with your bonus action. You can make as many attacks as you made with you attack action, up to a half your proficiency bonus (round up), but each attack takes a -5 penalty to hit.
If you offset the extra attacks with lower hit rate you're just rolling more dice to produce a similar number of hits.
I am looking at revising the Dual Wielder feat to be where a character receives a number of off hand attacks equal to half their proficiency bonus rounded up. Now the number of off hand attacks cannot exceed the number of mainhand attacks. WIth this the DW fighter at 20 has 4 mainhand and 3 offhand attacks. This brings the DPR closer in line to GWM and Sharpshooter builds.
They only are where this may cause issue is in conjunction with multiple abilities that can add additional damage per strike. Again, this is really only an issue with high level fighter as this will quickly add up.
Does it still cost a bonus action?
An extra attack is itself valuable, since it's another chance to hit on your turn. Once you factor in probability of a hit, (and to crit), it's worth more than just adding damage on one attack. (And this will make things like Hex/Hunter's mark more valuable too, and it skews the effect of advantage, and minimizes disadvantage).
I'm not saying Dual Wielding is fine, mind you. But as others point out, it's mainly because GWM and SS combine with other feats that also give a bonus action attack (PAM and XbowX), which means that the -5 to hit for using those feats is ameliorated by another chance to hit in a turn. This means DW suffers by comparison. The DW feat doesn't do enough to compensate, because the bonus from using heavier weapons equates to about +1 per attack. The +1 AC is nice, but not enough.
I wonder if the balance of a flat +1/2Prof attacks is enough, or if we need to consider something like the -5 to activate it that GWM/SS uses? for example:
When you use two-weapon fighting, you can choose to attack more than once with the off-hand weapon with your bonus action. You can make as many attacks as you made with you attack action, up to a half your proficiency bonus (round up), but each attack takes a -5 penalty to hit.
I wonder if that math checks out.
Unfortunately, this is one of those things that works at the high end but not the low end.
Say we do it your way and the character is a lvl 5 Fighter with TWF fighting style. At level 5 they have +3 PB and 2 Attacks so they would get 2 more attacks at -5 to hit. Depending on the AC of the target, this has a high chance of missing, whereas if they simply attack one with the off-hand (the way it works now), they have less potential damage but a much higher chance of hitting.
However, a lvl 11 character presumably has +5 to hit from their applicable stat plus 4 for their PB. They can make 3 attacks base plus the same 2 with the off-hand but now their chance to hit a typical foe is higher. This makes the gamble more worth it because of potentially the same payoff with less risk.
I don't think that a flat -5 to hit is the answer but I do think that tying it to the PB or perhaps the base number of Attacks might be the way to start.
I will attempt to run some numbers and add them to the conversation if possible.
This is much the same for GWM though. For lower AC targets, they get more bang out of the -5 compared to high AC targets. Similarly, the choice to make more attacks is optional, so it becomes a tactical calculation. I'm not married to the idea, but I thought it worth considering.
Some examples: Assumes 20 in attribute, target AC 15 , standard crit, 2-WF style .. showing average expected damage per round
Fighter 5, base +7 to hit , 2 attacks
vanilla Greatsword 16.3 (12% chance of missing both attacks)
GS + GWM 18.3 (36% chance of missing both)
Glaive + GWM+PAM 24 (22% chance of missing all)
Vanilla TWF: 2 rapiers: 19.2 (4% chance of missing all attacks)
with Expanded DW (4 attacks) : 25.6 (4% chance of missing all attacks)
DW-5 (2 attacks, 2@-5): 20.85
Fighter 11, base +9 to hit, 3 attacks
vanilla Greatsword 24 .5 (2% chance of missing all)
GS + GWM 34 (12% chance of missing all)
Glaive + GWM+PAM 48 (3% chance of missing all)
Vanilla TWF: 2 rapiers: 29.4 (4% chance of missing all attacks)
with Expanded DW (5 attacks) : 36.75 (<1% chance of missing all attacks)
DW-5 (3 attacks, 2@-5): 32 (<1% chance of missing all attacks)
The outlier continues to be GWM + PAM, which is 2 feats. The expanded DW proposal puts DW ahead at low levels, and in 2nd place at higher levels for the price of only one feat. That's also not accounting for possible ways to add damage per attack (such as with Hunter's Mark etc) and not accounting for expanded crit range, which would favor more attacks over the flat damage increase from GWM/SS.
An extra attack is itself valuable, since it's another chance to hit on your turn. Once you factor in probability of a hit, (and to crit), it's worth more than just adding damage on one attack. (And this will make things like Hex/Hunter's mark more valuable too, and it skews the effect of advantage, and minimizes disadvantage).
Number of hits only matters for per-hit effects like the ones you pointed out. If the hit rate is the same, there's no difference in expected value between 1 attack that deals 2d6 + 6 or 2 attacks that deal 1d6 + 3 each, regardless of advantage or disadvantage. You're just rolling more d20s, which is slower.
It's slower, that's true. But you're missing something: it's not 2d6+6, it's 2d6+3 vs 1d6+3 (or 1d8 if we're using rapiers). It's also the fact that you turn a 40% chance to whiff per round, into a 16% chance to whiff.
More attacks only make a difference when there's per-hit effects or effects that rely on hitting at least once during your turn (e.g. Sneak Attack). The more attacks you the more you slow the game down and add the more you risk a game-breaking combination involving a strong per-hit damage bonus.
I agree. I'm not really making an argument for this re-working of DW, I'm just analyzing what it might do, and if giving it the -5 makes it better or worse. Mathematically I think it puts it in the ballpark with GMW+PAM, but I'm not convinced that the game-play trade-offs are worth the effort.
But as others point out, it's mainly because GWM and SS combine with other feats that also give a bonus action attack (PAM and XbowX), which means that the -5 to hit for using those feats is ameliorated by another chance to hit in a turn.
Whether the -5/+10 is a good trade is completely independent of how many attacks you can make; it only depends on your hit rate and your damage. The bonus attacks from PAM and CE are a problem because 1) the damage from the extra attack far outweighs the reduction in your weapon's damage dice, and 2) it gives you another attack to apply per-hit bonuses to (which the +10 damage is). But if the -5 penalty outweighs the +10 damage, you're going to be losing damage on every hit and attacking more times isn't going to make that trade any better...you're just taking a loss more times.
But we're assuming that the players using this feat to trade the -5 for +10 have at least a gut instinct about when to use it (e.g. not against things they have trouble hitting without a -5). The reason GWM alone isn't as great as GWM+PAM is exactly the additional +10 from the additional attack in the same round that you get from PAM, and the fact that you need to miss with all attacks to not get that +10 at least once. And the more attacks you make (provided you have >50% chance to hit) the more likely you'll land at least one. e.g. 1 attack with 60% chance to hit means you miss 40% of the time. 2 attacks means you miss only 16% of the time. Admittedly you only have 36% chance to hit both times, but if you're adding flat bonuses to all your hits, (even a couple of points) it increases your DPR. (2d6+3 vs two times 1d6+3 makes a difference).
<snip>
If you offset the extra attacks with lower hit rate you're just rolling more dice to produce a similar number of hits.
Don't forget those flat bonuses from the attribute stack up. Although that's only with the fighting style, I guess. The accuracy trade-off is basically the same as GWM/SS. They're trading accuracy for more damage per hit. I'm not sure how this is all that different, apart from the "more dice" issue.
All that said, I'm not a big fan of this approach of adding more attacks on the bonus action. The fact it slows things down to resolve more attacks is a big strike against it, as you point out earlier.
If it wasn't for the fact it would take away from the Battle Master, I wouldn't mind a Two Weapon Duelist Feat that gave a Parry/Reposte combo. Basically as a reaction attempt to parry an attack and if successful you get a free retaliation attack. I know it isn't a lot, but I don't really want a rehash of SS/GWM tacked on to TWF. I would like something that is a bit more creative than that. I admit don't know exactly what, but something other than -x to hit = +x to damage.
If it wasn't for the fact it would take away from the Battle Master, I wouldn't mind a Two Weapon Duelist Feat that gave a Parry/Reposte combo. Basically as a reaction attempt to parry an attack and if successful you get a free retaliation attack. I know it isn't a lot, but I don't really want a rehash of SS/GWM tacked on to TWF. I would like something that is a bit more creative than that. I admitted don't know exactly what, but something other than -x to hit = +x to damage.
This is my take as well....I'd much rather it do something different than just compete for damage.
It's slower, that's true. But you're missing something: it's not 2d6+6, it's 2d6+3 vs 1d6+3 (or 1d8 if we're using rapiers).
I was referring to Grebeir's house rule where you get ⌈PB/2⌉ bonus attacks. Instead of making so many attacks they could combine multiple damage rolls into one hit and the end result would be the same.
It's also the fact that you turn a 40% chance to whiff per round, into a 16% chance to whiff.
Unless you have a "once per turn" effect like Sneak Attack, your odds of landing 0 hits has nothing to do with your average damage.
The reason GWM alone isn't as great as GWM+PAM is exactly the additional +10 from the additional attack in the same round that you get from PAM, and the fact that you need to miss with all attacks to not get that +10 at least once.
See above. GWM+PAM is better than PAM for the same reason PAM is better than no feat: it gives you an extra attack. GWM alone can still be game-breakingly powerful though, as I showed last pagein page 2. Your examples don't show a big gap because without any attack bonuses and advantage, the -5/+10 is barely any better than not using it, so you're just showing the benefits of PAM.
If you offset the extra attacks with lower hit rate you're just rolling more dice to produce a similar number of hits.
Don't forget those flat bonuses from the attribute stack up. Although that's only with the fighting style, I guess. The accuracy trade-off is basically the same as GWM/SS. They're trading accuracy for more damage per hit. I'm not sure how this is all that different, apart from the "more dice" issue.
They're not getting more damage per hit though, just gives them more attacks. If your way of balancing that is to reduce the chances of hitting, you might as well get rid of the -5 penalty and reduce the number of attacks directly.
If it wasn't for the fact it would take away from the Battle Master, I wouldn't mind a Two Weapon Duelist Feat that gave a Parry/Reposte combo.
I don't think it'd take away that much, honestly. Battle Masters can still use Riposte with any weapon and can add their Superiority Die to the result.
I know it isn't a lot, but I don't really want a rehash of SS/GWM tacked on to TWF. I would like something that is a bit more creative than that. I admit don't know exactly what, but something other than -x to hit = +x to damage.
It's not enough on its own to salvage the feat but it would've been cool if you could roll damage for both weapons on a crit.
You have honed your skill with two weapons to the point where defense and offense blend together in to a single fluid motion.
If an attack would hit you while wielding a melee weapon in each hand you may use your reaction to add your Proficiency bonus to your AC possibly causing the attack to miss instead. Should the attack miss, you may immediately make one melee attack against the creature that triggered the reaction.
You have honed your skill with two weapons to the point where defense and offense blend together in to a single fluid motion.
If an attack would hit you while wielding a melee weapon in each hand you may use your reaction to add your Proficiency bonus to your AC possibly causing the attack to miss instead. Should the attack miss, you may immediately make one melee attack against the creature that triggered the reaction.
Does this seem reasonable?
The defensive aspect alone is more powerful than Duelist (it works on ranged attacks and works with non-finesse weapons and works with weapons you aren't proficient with), and then you also hand out basically infinite-use Riposte (only without the extra damage). On the other hand, some feats are much more powerful than others. Here's a scaled-back version (switching from finesse to light on the duelist side) with tightened up wording; it's still by definition more powerful than Defensive Duelist and some other feats, but it might simply be on par with Sentinel, I don't know.
Dual Wielding Duelist
When you are wielding two light melee weapons with which you are proficient and another creature hits you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction to add your proficiency bonus to your AC for that attack, potentially causing the attack to miss you. If the attack misses you, as part of the same reaction you can make a melee weapon attack with a light melee weapon against the attacking creature.
Edit: I just realized Defensive Duelist lets you parry spell attacks, which is hilariously absurd, so here's a deliberately nerfed version to justify the power of adding the response attack.
Dual Wielding Duelist v2.0
When you are wielding two light melee weapons with which you are proficient and another creature hits you with a melee weapon attack, you can use your reaction to add your proficiency bonus to your AC for that attack, potentially causing the attack to miss you. If the attack misses you, as part of the same reaction you can make a melee weapon attack with a light melee weapon against the attacking creature.
You have honed your skill with two weapons to the point where defense and offense blend together in to a single fluid motion.
If an attack would hit you while wielding a melee weapon in each hand you may use your reaction to add your Proficiency bonus to your AC possibly causing the attack to miss instead. Should the attack miss, you may immediately make one melee attack against the creature that triggered the reaction.
Does this seem reasonable?
The defensive aspect alone is more powerful than Duelist (it works on ranged attacks and works with non-finesse weapons and works with weapons you aren't proficient with), and then you also hand out basically infinite-use Riposte (only without the extra damage). On the other hand, some feats are much more powerful than others. Here's a scaled-back version (switching from finesse to light on the duelist side) with tightened up wording; it's still by definition more powerful than Defensive Duelist and some other feats, but it might simply be on par with Sentinel, I don't know.
Dual Wielding Duelist
When you are wielding two light melee weapons with which you are proficient and another creature hits you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction to add your proficiency bonus to your AC for that attack, potentially causing the attack to miss you. If the attack misses you, as part of the same reaction you can make a melee weapon attack with a light melee weapon against the attacking creature.
Edit: I just realized Defensive Duelist lets you parry spell attacks, which is hilariously absurd, so here's a deliberately nerfed version to justify the power of adding the response attack.
Dual Wielding Duelist v2.0
When you are wielding two light melee weapons with which you are proficient and another creature hits you with a melee weapon attack, you can use your reaction to add your proficiency bonus to your AC for that attack, potentially causing the attack to miss you. If the attack misses you, as part of the same reaction you can make a melee weapon attack with a light melee weapon against the attacking creature.
That makes sense. What happens if they have the Dual Wielder Feat? Does that remove the light weapon requirement from this one as well?
It's slower, that's true. But you're missing something: it's not 2d6+6, it's 2d6+3 vs 1d6+3 (or 1d8 if we're using rapiers).
I was referring to Grebeir's house rule where you get ⌈PB/2⌉ bonus attacks. Instead of making so many attacks they could combine multiple damage rolls into one hit and the end result would be the same.
Ahh. I misunderstood. That's fair, I guess.
It's also the fact that you turn a 40% chance to whiff per round, into a 16% chance to whiff.
Unless you have a "once per turn" effect like Sneak Attack, your odds of landing 0 hits has nothing to do with your average damage.
Not average DPR over time, no. But in game play, extra attacks make quite a difference. You can attack two targets instead of one, for example, if your first hit killed one enemy, you can move on to the next, and the over-kill damage won't be wasted. And applying some damage on your turn may make the difference between an enemy lasting one round more, or dying before it's next turn because someone else killed it on theirs.
The reason GWM alone isn't as great as GWM+PAM is exactly the additional +10 from the additional attack in the same round that you get from PAM, and the fact that you need to miss with all attacks to not get that +10 at least once.
See above. GWM+PAM is better than PAM for the same reason PAM is better than no feat: it gives you an extra attack. GWM alone can still be game-breakingly powerful though, as I showed last pagein page 2. Your examples don't show a big gap because without any attack bonuses and advantage, the -5/+10 is barely any better than not using it, so you're just showing the benefits of PAM.
Oh sure. I picked AC 15 because it's apparently the average of ACs across the spectrum of monsters. AC 12 and/or advantage widens the gap considerably, but AC 20 and/or disadvantage tips the scales away from using the -5 unless you have >+15 to hit.
If you offset the extra attacks with lower hit rate you're just rolling more dice to produce a similar number of hits.
Don't forget those flat bonuses from the attribute stack up. Although that's only with the fighting style, I guess. The accuracy trade-off is basically the same as GWM/SS. They're trading accuracy for more damage per hit. I'm not sure how this is all that different, apart from the "more dice" issue.
They're not getting more damage per hit though, just gives them more attacks. If your way of balancing that is to reduce the chances of hitting, you might as well get rid of the -5 penalty and reduce the number of attacks directly.
Well, I meant "more damage per turn". They're taking a higher chance of missing per attack to get more damage over all. In that sense it's the same as GWM/SS. It's useful in broadly the same circumstances and with broadly the same result. Imagine you're getting +10 per attack for 3 attacks, or +3 attacks @ 1d8+5. That's roughly equivalent additional damage for the -5. It's just extra die rolls to get them.
But that leads me to a different idea:
Dual Weapon Mastery -- Simultaneous Attack: When you make an Attack while wielding two weapons, you can take a -5 penalty to your attack roll with your main hand weapon, and if you hit, increase the damage of the attack by the damage of your off-hand weapon.
That's a lot closer to GWM in usage, with fewer die-rolls.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It has diminishing effects as your base damage increases, not as monster hp increase.
If i would design a feat for Duwal wielder it would look something like this.
This would be an attempt to make the feat "as good" as GWM or SS.
To the first point. This makes especially fighters able to pull of an awesome turn combined with actionsurge. It's still limited in use, but can be devastating an lead to really cool situations. Additionally other dualwielder are are now maybe even a considerable target for spells like haste and will profit more from advantage too, but in a different way. So they can add up the damage but will never reach the mastery of a true fighter here (wich should often be the case anyway).
To the second point. I really like the feat defensive duelist, but in all honesty it's not good enoug compared to A LOT of other feats like Slasher/piercer/crusher/SS/GWM or something like that. So i tried to find a way to make this AC-Buff against a SIngle hit worthwhile for taking a feat. In my opinion it is needed, that this reaction could be made additionaly to an attack of opportunity. In this way it doesn't feel like a too taxing tradeoff (the trade-off that is already been made is the taken feat). Additionaly since it only protects against a single attack the AC-bonus should be higher. In my approach the Dualwielder stays a clear dex-build so his AC will be lower as his strength based counterparts, so a higher buff will make a lot of sense. Additionally the player using this special reaction to one time dodge an attack that would even hit the tank will feel pretty awesome and rewarded for the feat but will not be protected against further attacks.
I didn't calculated it all down and as always things like these need to be playtested. Maybe the parry needs to be tuned down back again to defensive duelist.
I would alter this to be Dex OR Str modifier so as to not diss the Str-centric characters but otherwise, this is pretty good.
The fact that Reserved Action even eliminated off-hand attacks means that almost everything involving two-handed fighting in this game needs a balance pass. Not everyone WANTS to be the huge Barb with the great ax.
I am looking at revising the Dual Wielder feat to be where a character receives a number of off hand attacks equal to half their proficiency bonus rounded up. Now the number of off hand attacks cannot exceed the number of mainhand attacks. WIth this the DW fighter at 20 has 4 mainhand and 3 offhand attacks. This brings the DPR closer in line to GWM and Sharpshooter builds.
They only are where this may cause issue is in conjunction with multiple abilities that can add additional damage per strike. Again, this is really only an issue with high level fighter as this will quickly add up.
I like this approach. I don't really worry about what the characters can do at lvl 20 because most games never make it that far. By lvl 20 full casters can summon meteors and cause earthquakes. I'm not really worried if the TW fighter can do 10-15 more damage.
Does it still cost a bonus action?
An extra attack is itself valuable, since it's another chance to hit on your turn. Once you factor in probability of a hit, (and to crit), it's worth more than just adding damage on one attack. (And this will make things like Hex/Hunter's mark more valuable too, and it skews the effect of advantage, and minimizes disadvantage).
I'm not saying Dual Wielding is fine, mind you.
But as others point out, it's mainly because GWM and SS combine with other feats that also give a bonus action attack (PAM and XbowX), which means that the -5 to hit for using those feats is ameliorated by another chance to hit in a turn.
This means DW suffers by comparison. The DW feat doesn't do enough to compensate, because the bonus from using heavier weapons equates to about +1 per attack. The +1 AC is nice, but not enough.
I wonder if the balance of a flat +1/2Prof attacks is enough, or if we need to consider something like the -5 to activate it that GWM/SS uses?
for example:
I wonder if that math checks out.
Unfortunately, this is one of those things that works at the high end but not the low end.
Say we do it your way and the character is a lvl 5 Fighter with TWF fighting style. At level 5 they have +3 PB and 2 Attacks so they would get 2 more attacks at -5 to hit. Depending on the AC of the target, this has a high chance of missing, whereas if they simply attack one with the off-hand (the way it works now), they have less potential damage but a much higher chance of hitting.
However, a lvl 11 character presumably has +5 to hit from their applicable stat plus 4 for their PB. They can make 3 attacks base plus the same 2 with the off-hand but now their chance to hit a typical foe is higher. This makes the gamble more worth it because of potentially the same payoff with less risk.
I don't think that a flat -5 to hit is the answer but I do think that tying it to the PB or perhaps the base number of Attacks might be the way to start.
I will attempt to run some numbers and add them to the conversation if possible.
It'd be more crit-friendly to use a damage die (e.g. 1d4). You can't double static bonuses on a crit.
Number of hits only matters for per-hit effects like the ones you pointed out. If the hit rate is the same, there's no difference in expected value between 1 attack that deals 2d6 + 6 or 2 attacks that deal 1d6 + 3 each, regardless of advantage or disadvantage. You're just rolling more d20s, which is slower.
More attacks only make a difference when there's per-hit effects or effects that rely on hitting at least once during your turn (e.g. Sneak Attack). The more attacks you the more you slow the game down and add the more you risk a game-breaking combination involving a strong per-hit damage bonus.
Whether the -5/+10 is a good trade is completely independent of how many attacks you can make; it only depends on your hit rate and your damage. The bonus attacks from PAM and CE are a problem because 1) the damage from the extra attack far outweighs the reduction in your weapon's damage dice, and 2) it gives you another attack to apply per-hit bonuses to (which the +10 damage is). But if the -5 penalty outweighs the +10 damage, you're going to be losing damage on every hit and attacking more times isn't going to make that trade any better...you're just taking a loss more times.
If you offset the extra attacks with lower hit rate you're just rolling more dice to produce a similar number of hits.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
This is much the same for GWM though. For lower AC targets, they get more bang out of the -5 compared to high AC targets. Similarly, the choice to make more attacks is optional, so it becomes a tactical calculation. I'm not married to the idea, but I thought it worth considering.
Some examples:
Assumes 20 in attribute, target AC 15 , standard crit, 2-WF style .. showing average expected damage per round
The outlier continues to be GWM + PAM, which is 2 feats. The expanded DW proposal puts DW ahead at low levels, and in 2nd place at higher levels for the price of only one feat.
That's also not accounting for possible ways to add damage per attack (such as with Hunter's Mark etc) and not accounting for expanded crit range, which would favor more attacks over the flat damage increase from GWM/SS.
(Edited -- got the level 11 PAM values wrong).
It's slower, that's true. But you're missing something: it's not 2d6+6, it's 2d6+3 vs 1d6+3 (or 1d8 if we're using rapiers). It's also the fact that you turn a 40% chance to whiff per round, into a 16% chance to whiff.
I agree. I'm not really making an argument for this re-working of DW, I'm just analyzing what it might do, and if giving it the -5 makes it better or worse. Mathematically I think it puts it in the ballpark with GMW+PAM, but I'm not convinced that the game-play trade-offs are worth the effort.
But we're assuming that the players using this feat to trade the -5 for +10 have at least a gut instinct about when to use it (e.g. not against things they have trouble hitting without a -5).
The reason GWM alone isn't as great as GWM+PAM is exactly the additional +10 from the additional attack in the same round that you get from PAM, and the fact that you need to miss with all attacks to not get that +10 at least once. And the more attacks you make (provided you have >50% chance to hit) the more likely you'll land at least one.
e.g. 1 attack with 60% chance to hit means you miss 40% of the time. 2 attacks means you miss only 16% of the time. Admittedly you only have 36% chance to hit both times, but if you're adding flat bonuses to all your hits, (even a couple of points) it increases your DPR. (2d6+3 vs two times 1d6+3 makes a difference).
Don't forget those flat bonuses from the attribute stack up. Although that's only with the fighting style, I guess. The accuracy trade-off is basically the same as GWM/SS. They're trading accuracy for more damage per hit. I'm not sure how this is all that different, apart from the "more dice" issue.
All that said, I'm not a big fan of this approach of adding more attacks on the bonus action. The fact it slows things down to resolve more attacks is a big strike against it, as you point out earlier.
If it wasn't for the fact it would take away from the Battle Master, I wouldn't mind a Two Weapon Duelist Feat that gave a Parry/Reposte combo. Basically as a reaction attempt to parry an attack and if successful you get a free retaliation attack. I know it isn't a lot, but I don't really want a rehash of SS/GWM tacked on to TWF. I would like something that is a bit more creative than that. I admit don't know exactly what, but something other than -x to hit = +x to damage.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
This is my take as well....I'd much rather it do something different than just compete for damage.
I was referring to Grebeir's house rule where you get ⌈PB/2⌉ bonus attacks. Instead of making so many attacks they could combine multiple damage rolls into one hit and the end result would be the same.
Unless you have a "once per turn" effect like Sneak Attack, your odds of landing 0 hits has nothing to do with your average damage.
See above. GWM+PAM is better than PAM for the same reason PAM is better than no feat: it gives you an extra attack. GWM alone can still be game-breakingly powerful though, as I showed
last pagein page 2. Your examples don't show a big gap because without any attack bonuses and advantage, the -5/+10 is barely any better than not using it, so you're just showing the benefits of PAM.They're not getting more damage per hit though, just gives them more attacks. If your way of balancing that is to reduce the chances of hitting, you might as well get rid of the -5 penalty and reduce the number of attacks directly.
I don't think it'd take away that much, honestly. Battle Masters can still use Riposte with any weapon and can add their Superiority Die to the result.
It's not enough on its own to salvage the feat but it would've been cool if you could roll damage for both weapons on a crit.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
Does this seem reasonable?
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
The defensive aspect alone is more powerful than Duelist (it works on ranged attacks and works with non-finesse weapons and works with weapons you aren't proficient with), and then you also hand out basically infinite-use Riposte (only without the extra damage). On the other hand, some feats are much more powerful than others. Here's a scaled-back version (switching from finesse to light on the duelist side) with tightened up wording; it's still by definition more powerful than Defensive Duelist and some other feats, but it might simply be on par with Sentinel, I don't know.
Edit: I just realized Defensive Duelist lets you parry spell attacks, which is hilariously absurd, so here's a deliberately nerfed version to justify the power of adding the response attack.
That makes sense. What happens if they have the Dual Wielder Feat? Does that remove the light weapon requirement from this one as well?
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Ahh. I misunderstood. That's fair, I guess.
Not average DPR over time, no. But in game play, extra attacks make quite a difference. You can attack two targets instead of one, for example, if your first hit killed one enemy, you can move on to the next, and the over-kill damage won't be wasted. And applying some damage on your turn may make the difference between an enemy lasting one round more, or dying before it's next turn because someone else killed it on theirs.
Oh sure. I picked AC 15 because it's apparently the average of ACs across the spectrum of monsters. AC 12 and/or advantage widens the gap considerably, but AC 20 and/or disadvantage tips the scales away from using the -5 unless you have >+15 to hit.
Well, I meant "more damage per turn". They're taking a higher chance of missing per attack to get more damage over all. In that sense it's the same as GWM/SS. It's useful in broadly the same circumstances and with broadly the same result. Imagine you're getting +10 per attack for 3 attacks, or +3 attacks @ 1d8+5. That's roughly equivalent additional damage for the -5. It's just extra die rolls to get them.
But that leads me to a different idea:
Dual Weapon Mastery -- Simultaneous Attack: When you make an Attack while wielding two weapons, you can take a -5 penalty to your attack roll with your main hand weapon, and if you hit, increase the damage of the attack by the damage of your off-hand weapon.
That's a lot closer to GWM in usage, with fewer die-rolls.