Ok fair enough, I sort of see what your concerns are. But I still disagree on a few points.
First, I think it's ok if a certain style of combat tends to be more beneficial to one class over another. This is part of what gives each class their own identity. I think you're getting too concerned with whether or not the change is fair for everyone rather than just keeping the design simple and in line with the rest of the game.
Second, similarly I don't think we need to be too concerned with the math behind how every character might possibly min/max their damage output. Some prioritize this and others are just more concerned with role-playing how their character actually fights. Keep the design decisions to factors that make sense within the system and then let the players decide what they want to do
Third, sort of along those same lines, I still think that removing the Bonus Action requirement from this ability to use the off-hand to make additional attacks beyond the ones which already required our full action . . . is too much of a departure from the core rules. Generally the idea is that we use a full action to take an Attack action. At level 1 a fighter just isn't fast enough to swing the weapon, regain balance, return their weapon back to neutral and then also take another swing without using another full action. But the rules say that he is just barely fast enough to very quickly squeeze in another attack by using the other hand as a Bonus Action. Going from that to somehow not requiring any action just doesn't fit with the core design.
The main problem is that it doesn't scale. I don't personally think it's a problem that some characters might want to use the Bonus Action for something else. That player just has a choice to make which is part of the fun. Provide options instead of just having it all.
Maybe the best way to scale this is to just add an additional class feature within certain select martial classes. That way you don't need to be a multiclass like we had to be for the OP Extra Attack stacking idea. It could be called "improved Two-Weapon Fighting" or something. For example maybe a Fighter gets this at Level 8 and Level 16. Maybe a Monk gets it once at around Level 12. And so on.
Ok fair enough, I sort of see what your concerns are. But I still disagree on a few points.
First, I think it's ok if a certain style of combat tends to be more beneficial to one class over another. This is part of what gives each class their own identity. I think you're getting too concerned with whether or not the change is fair for everyone rather than just keeping the design simple and in line with the rest of the game.
I'm not advocating for homogeny, rather that TWF shouldn't shoehorn you as much as it does. If you look at the second post of this thread, there's a lot of costs associated with picking up TWF as your fantasy. TWF starts out with some merit over a two-hander, but it all disappears at level 5 and then it just goes downhill. I don't think it's a matter of min/max'ing as much as the combat style being unviable for the current ruleset. Anyone who picks up TWF without researching anything will see that whenever they compare themselves to others in terms of damage, they come up short.
Oh an opportunity attack, I deal 1d6 + modifiers while my buddy deals 2d6 + mods...
That's just a feel bad experience. I had that same experience back in 3e. Which is why I always research the viability of TWF, as it is my preferred fantasy. However it seems like DND generally doesn't do balancing of TWF well. Most of the time it is bad. In 5e the simplicity of the system makes TWF fall utterly short of even just a one-hander duelist build. Giving up your singular Bonus Action makes so many class features either useless or drastically worse. And the disparity is within this mindset that one weapon attack is the same, if it's done with two hands or one hand, doesn't matter.
I seek to eliminate some of that disparity.
Second, similarly I don't think we need to be too concerned with the math behind how every character might possibly min/max their damage output. Some prioritize this and others are just more concerned with role-playing how their character actually fights. Keep the design decisions to factors that make sense within the system and then let the players decide what they want to do
You have to be concerned about min-max'ing as that is what breaks rulesets and eliminates choice. If you get the option between three ice cream cones all at 10$ and one has only one scoop of vanilla, the other has 5 different pre-determined scoops and the last has 3 scoops you can choose from among the available flavors... Do you think anyone would ever feel good about buying the singular vanilla scoop cone?
Similarly with three options, where one is with vanilla, one is with chocolate, and the final option has vanilla, chocolate, strawberry, lime, and pistachio. All costs 10$, all scoops are same size. Is there even a choice?
I would much rather that the rules enables immersive roleplaying, while providing different but somewhat equivalent options. TWF doesn't provide anything significant past level 5, but it has a load of baggage and limitations associated with it. This is a clear case of the first scenario with the singular vanilla scoop. People are free to pick it, it's still ice cream, but you're most likely going to have a bad experience when comparing to the other options. That is a failure to provide an even playing field.
Third, sort of along those same lines, I still think that removing the Bonus Action requirement from this ability to use the off-hand to make additional attacks beyond the ones which already required our full action . . . is too much of a departure from the core rules. Generally the idea is that we use a full action to take an Attack action. At level 1 a fighter just isn't fast enough to swing the weapon, regain balance, return their weapon back to neutral and then also take another swing without using another full action. But the rules say that he is just barely fast enough to very quickly squeeze in another attack by using the other hand as a Bonus Action. Going from that to somehow not requiring any action just doesn't fit with the core design.
You're technically fine with a level 10 character having 3 main-hand attacks and 1 off-hand attack through a simplified version of the OP's suggestion. Compared to a Fighter who first gets that 3rd main attack (no built-in Bonus Action attack) at level 11. I feel like you're gaslighting yourself into believing this makes sense but removing the Bonus Action tax on TWF (to be somewhat equivalent to a two-hander build) is somehow problematic.
If we consider two level 1 characters one with TWF and one with a Polearm (with Polearm Master) the TWF can strike once with both their weapons while the Polearm wielder can make a strike, then swing around with the stump end for another attack and it requires the same exertion. If we consider a physical / realistic setting, this would likely be the case. Arms masters generally consider the two weapon fighter's flurry of swings to be unrealistic, and the clear winner is generally a two-handed weapon and to some extend a sword and shield. They do however point out that historically a two weapon wielder has more ability to maneuver their opponent's weapon during combat. This functionality is unfortunately already in use by the Fighter's Battle Master subclass - where some of the better maneuvers do cost a BA. But we're not here to find out what is physically realistic, we're here to have fun and to fulfill a fantasy.
If I were to ask you blankly; should a two weapon wielder be of equivalent power to a two-handed weapon wielder within this fantasy setting? I imagine your answer would be yes. However they are not equal. There are more limitations put on the two weapon wielder. There are less options for them. And the benefit they have is not significant to outweigh their drawbacks. Thus they are not of equivalent power within the setting.
Removing the Bonus Action cost to TWF is a step toward evening out the playing field.
And just a fun fact, Fighter and Ranger are the only two with this fighting style, but they are also some of the classes (or rather subclasses) that utilize their bonus action significantly more than most other classes. If TWF said you traded your bonus action to make an attack with your other weapon every time you attacked with a one handed weapon, then it essentially doubles your weapon swings and would be a significant benefit most likely worth foregoing your other Bonus Action expenditures. However that is thankfully not the case. because not every build utilizes their Bonus Action - so that would just be mostly up-side with medium down-side (again refer to 2nd post of this thread).
The main problem is that it doesn't scale. I don't personally think it's a problem that some characters might want to use the Bonus Action for something else. That player just has a choice to make which is part of the fun. Provide options instead of just having it all.
You're technically correct that the main problem is the lack of scaling which leaves TWF behind every other similar build. However that is considering those who can use TWF efficiently at this moment. Another just as big problem is that a large portion of those who could pick it up, wont because it costs too much.
Funny enough RPGbot who makes guides for DnD says that TWF Ranger is a staple, but going through the subclasses, many utilize their bonus action or has features that conflicts with TWF:
Beastmaster uses their BA for companion attacks
Drakewarden just as so
Feywanderer technically doesn't use their BA before lvl 15 (to cast Misty Step) but they do want to spell cast, which classes with the two weapons in hand and the Somatic component of spell casting (and also the Material) and most importantly their 3rd level class feature is a bonus damage proc once per turn per creature - which is way easier to ensure multiple procs per turn with a ranged weapon, than with TWF in melee range. Granted it either has to be past level 5 or with the Crossbow Expert feat (which is technically ranged TWF)
Gloom Stalker's ambush grants an additional weapon attack, judge for yourself if you want a 1d6, 1d8, 1d10, 1d12 or 2d6 weapon attack.
Horizon Walker locks their BA for force damage conversion +1d8/2d8 damage for one attack (well mostly first when you hit that 2d8 damage die on lvl 11 or you hit opponents with physical damage resistances)
Hunter doesn't technically mind, but some of their later class features are so so much stronger with a non TWF build (again a case where a weapon attack is not really the same when comparing TWF builds to other builds)
Monster Slayer uses their BA to designate targets for 1d6 bonus damage once per turn (basically a one-time proc per turn free Hunter's Mark for a BA)
Swarmkeeper generally has benefits to kite targets (or technically chase) and use their BA on occasion to gain short range flying (10 ft.) - again something that seems more useful to a ranged character than a TWF.
So from that list only Swarmkeeper is not hindered and a case can be made for Horizon Walker until level 11, but neither do they particularly benefit from TWF, being back again to the baseline of comparing TWF to a 2-hander and GWM/SS's scaling.
Freeing up the bonus action from TWF would help at least Beastmaster, Drakewarden and Monster Slayer to not shy away from TWF (as well as half of Fighter's subclasses) and a case can be made for Horizon Walker - depending on how important that force damage conversion really is. I would consider that rule change a win, because it first comes into effect on level 5, so by the time a two-hander closes the damage gap, you are both free to use your bonus action on something else.
Maybe the best way to scale this is to just add an additional class feature within certain select martial classes. That way you don't need to be a multiclass like we had to be for the OP Extra Attack stacking idea. It could be called "improved Two-Weapon Fighting" or something. For example maybe a Fighter gets this at Level 8 and Level 16. Maybe a Monk gets it once at around Level 12. And so on.
To help make TWF more viable you want to add very build specific features to select subclasses or main-classes in general? Again I feel like this is shoehorning TWF into a build, rather than opening the mechanic up for more viability in existing builds.
To me a more elegant way is to change existing tools or add new ones that assist TWF either directly or indirectly to reflect the costs associated with the build style and to be more equivalent with other similar builds. And the more generic/open-ended you can make these tools, the better.
An example of this would be something along the lines of one of the suggestions to a new feat I posted about earlier:
Whenever you attack with a melee weapon that you wield in one hand that you are proficient with, you may add half (rounded up) of your ability score modifier for Strength or Dexterity (your choice) to the attack and damage rolls of that attack. You cannot use the same ability score modifier through this feat that you are already using for your attack.
This is generic enough that a duelist-style or sword-and-board build could pick up this feat, but a TWF would get one additional weapon attack's worth of the benefit. It conflicts between Strength and Dexterity, which most builds don't want to invest in both. However a TWF Fighter that gains many ASIs could utilize this to effectively gain +3 with the feat for a total of +8 to attack and damage rolls. Mind you, that's 5x ASIs to get a 15 STR, 15 DEX start build to 20, 20 and 1x ASI for the feat. With racial features that's achievable from level 14. That's 4 ASIs worth of investment to gain +3 to attack and damage rolls (and obviously any stat benefits) or 2 ASIs worth of investment to leave Dex at 16 but still get +2 from the feat.
The feat would have some other benefit which could be a stat increase (making it a half-feat) or a specific benefit for TWF style builds, like one or two of those I suggested in the same post previously.
Hmm... going through the numbers, the rounding probably has to be rounded down. Otherwise a level 4 Fighter can pick up a racial ASI to make STR and DEX 16 each and an ASI on 4 to pick up the feat to effectively get +5 to attack and damage rolls. That's too much. Then it's a question whether there should be an exception to make it round up on Stat 20 - like a double down bonus to get that +3. Or the feat could be as is but have a prerequisite of a proficiency bonus +4 (PC lvl 9 with next ASI on PC lvl 12) or +5 (PC level 13 with next ASI on lvl 14 for a Fighter/16 everyone else). More likely it should only count for damage rolls and not attack rolls. It's not particularly balanced as is when you think about min/max.
For comparison a Wizard - Bladesinging at level 14 gets the ability to add their INT modifier to their damage rolls.
If you want to specifically make non-feat (non-investment) changes, I would focus on the core mechanic. Because it doesn't work particularly well with the other systems in the game and that's a major part of what is dragging the mechanic down, especially in the later stages. The two main culprits being the bonus action and the weapon swing damage.
I think the proposal is just to be able to use your second instance of Extra Attack on your off-hand weapon when you use your Bonus Action to attack with that off-hand weapon (when utilizing the two-weapon fighting rule from Chapter 9). This would give certain multiclass characters' one additional off-hand attack at around the same time that a single classed Fighter would pick up a 3rd main hand attack anyway.
I think that the cleanest way to do this if we wanted to actually modify the rule book would be to change the paragraph that relates to Extra Attack in Chapter 6:
Extra Attack
If you gain the Extra Attack class feature from more than one class, the features don't add together with one exception. The Extra Attack class feature gained from the second class may be applied to the Bonus Action attack while two-weapon fighting. You can't make more than two attacks with this feature unless it says you do (as the fighter's version of Extra Attack does). Similarly, the warlock's eldritch invocation Thirsting Blade doesn't give you additional attacks if you also have Extra Attack.
The wording would have to be cleaned up but you get the idea.
This just enables 3 attacks with the primary weapon and 1 attack with your secondary weapon.
Attack Action: Attack once with each weapon. Primary, then secondary.
Bonus Action: Since you attacked with the secondary weapon your primary weapon is now an "other light weapon in your other hand" so you attack with it twice as your Bonus Action.
Primary Weapon x3. Secondary Weapon x1.
It is basically just the L11 Extra Attack feature from fighters but far more convoluted.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Ok fair enough, I sort of see what your concerns are. But I still disagree on a few points.
First, I think it's ok if a certain style of combat tends to be more beneficial to one class over another. This is part of what gives each class their own identity. I think you're getting too concerned with whether or not the change is fair for everyone rather than just keeping the design simple and in line with the rest of the game.
Second, similarly I don't think we need to be too concerned with the math behind how every character might possibly min/max their damage output. Some prioritize this and others are just more concerned with role-playing how their character actually fights. Keep the design decisions to factors that make sense within the system and then let the players decide what they want to do
Third, sort of along those same lines, I still think that removing the Bonus Action requirement from this ability to use the off-hand to make additional attacks beyond the ones which already required our full action . . . is too much of a departure from the core rules. Generally the idea is that we use a full action to take an Attack action. At level 1 a fighter just isn't fast enough to swing the weapon, regain balance, return their weapon back to neutral and then also take another swing without using another full action. But the rules say that he is just barely fast enough to very quickly squeeze in another attack by using the other hand as a Bonus Action. Going from that to somehow not requiring any action just doesn't fit with the core design.
The main problem is that it doesn't scale. I don't personally think it's a problem that some characters might want to use the Bonus Action for something else. That player just has a choice to make which is part of the fun. Provide options instead of just having it all.
Maybe the best way to scale this is to just add an additional class feature within certain select martial classes. That way you don't need to be a multiclass like we had to be for the OP Extra Attack stacking idea. It could be called "improved Two-Weapon Fighting" or something. For example maybe a Fighter gets this at Level 8 and Level 16. Maybe a Monk gets it once at around Level 12. And so on.
I'm not advocating for homogeny, rather that TWF shouldn't shoehorn you as much as it does. If you look at the second post of this thread, there's a lot of costs associated with picking up TWF as your fantasy. TWF starts out with some merit over a two-hander, but it all disappears at level 5 and then it just goes downhill. I don't think it's a matter of min/max'ing as much as the combat style being unviable for the current ruleset. Anyone who picks up TWF without researching anything will see that whenever they compare themselves to others in terms of damage, they come up short.
Oh an opportunity attack, I deal 1d6 + modifiers while my buddy deals 2d6 + mods...
That's just a feel bad experience. I had that same experience back in 3e. Which is why I always research the viability of TWF, as it is my preferred fantasy. However it seems like DND generally doesn't do balancing of TWF well. Most of the time it is bad. In 5e the simplicity of the system makes TWF fall utterly short of even just a one-hander duelist build. Giving up your singular Bonus Action makes so many class features either useless or drastically worse. And the disparity is within this mindset that one weapon attack is the same, if it's done with two hands or one hand, doesn't matter.
I seek to eliminate some of that disparity.
You have to be concerned about min-max'ing as that is what breaks rulesets and eliminates choice. If you get the option between three ice cream cones all at 10$ and one has only one scoop of vanilla, the other has 5 different pre-determined scoops and the last has 3 scoops you can choose from among the available flavors... Do you think anyone would ever feel good about buying the singular vanilla scoop cone?
Similarly with three options, where one is with vanilla, one is with chocolate, and the final option has vanilla, chocolate, strawberry, lime, and pistachio. All costs 10$, all scoops are same size. Is there even a choice?
I would much rather that the rules enables immersive roleplaying, while providing different but somewhat equivalent options. TWF doesn't provide anything significant past level 5, but it has a load of baggage and limitations associated with it. This is a clear case of the first scenario with the singular vanilla scoop. People are free to pick it, it's still ice cream, but you're most likely going to have a bad experience when comparing to the other options. That is a failure to provide an even playing field.
You're technically fine with a level 10 character having 3 main-hand attacks and 1 off-hand attack through a simplified version of the OP's suggestion. Compared to a Fighter who first gets that 3rd main attack (no built-in Bonus Action attack) at level 11. I feel like you're gaslighting yourself into believing this makes sense but removing the Bonus Action tax on TWF (to be somewhat equivalent to a two-hander build) is somehow problematic.
If we consider two level 1 characters one with TWF and one with a Polearm (with Polearm Master) the TWF can strike once with both their weapons while the Polearm wielder can make a strike, then swing around with the stump end for another attack and it requires the same exertion. If we consider a physical / realistic setting, this would likely be the case. Arms masters generally consider the two weapon fighter's flurry of swings to be unrealistic, and the clear winner is generally a two-handed weapon and to some extend a sword and shield. They do however point out that historically a two weapon wielder has more ability to maneuver their opponent's weapon during combat. This functionality is unfortunately already in use by the Fighter's Battle Master subclass - where some of the better maneuvers do cost a BA.
But we're not here to find out what is physically realistic, we're here to have fun and to fulfill a fantasy.
If I were to ask you blankly; should a two weapon wielder be of equivalent power to a two-handed weapon wielder within this fantasy setting? I imagine your answer would be yes. However they are not equal. There are more limitations put on the two weapon wielder. There are less options for them. And the benefit they have is not significant to outweigh their drawbacks. Thus they are not of equivalent power within the setting.
Removing the Bonus Action cost to TWF is a step toward evening out the playing field.
And just a fun fact, Fighter and Ranger are the only two with this fighting style, but they are also some of the classes (or rather subclasses) that utilize their bonus action significantly more than most other classes. If TWF said you traded your bonus action to make an attack with your other weapon every time you attacked with a one handed weapon, then it essentially doubles your weapon swings and would be a significant benefit most likely worth foregoing your other Bonus Action expenditures. However that is thankfully not the case. because not every build utilizes their Bonus Action - so that would just be mostly up-side with medium down-side (again refer to 2nd post of this thread).
You're technically correct that the main problem is the lack of scaling which leaves TWF behind every other similar build. However that is considering those who can use TWF efficiently at this moment. Another just as big problem is that a large portion of those who could pick it up, wont because it costs too much.
Funny enough RPGbot who makes guides for DnD says that TWF Ranger is a staple, but going through the subclasses, many utilize their bonus action or has features that conflicts with TWF:
So from that list only Swarmkeeper is not hindered and a case can be made for Horizon Walker until level 11, but neither do they particularly benefit from TWF, being back again to the baseline of comparing TWF to a 2-hander and GWM/SS's scaling.
Freeing up the bonus action from TWF would help at least Beastmaster, Drakewarden and Monster Slayer to not shy away from TWF (as well as half of Fighter's subclasses) and a case can be made for Horizon Walker - depending on how important that force damage conversion really is. I would consider that rule change a win, because it first comes into effect on level 5, so by the time a two-hander closes the damage gap, you are both free to use your bonus action on something else.
To help make TWF more viable you want to add very build specific features to select subclasses or main-classes in general? Again I feel like this is shoehorning TWF into a build, rather than opening the mechanic up for more viability in existing builds.
To me a more elegant way is to change existing tools or add new ones that assist TWF either directly or indirectly to reflect the costs associated with the build style and to be more equivalent with other similar builds. And the more generic/open-ended you can make these tools, the better.
An example of this would be something along the lines of one of the suggestions to a new feat I posted about earlier:
This is generic enough that a duelist-style or sword-and-board build could pick up this feat, but a TWF would get one additional weapon attack's worth of the benefit. It conflicts between Strength and Dexterity, which most builds don't want to invest in both. However a TWF Fighter that gains many ASIs could utilize this to effectively gain +3 with the feat for a total of +8 to attack and damage rolls. Mind you, that's 5x ASIs to get a 15 STR, 15 DEX start build to 20, 20 and 1x ASI for the feat. With racial features that's achievable from level 14. That's 4 ASIs worth of investment to gain +3 to attack and damage rolls (and obviously any stat benefits) or 2 ASIs worth of investment to leave Dex at 16 but still get +2 from the feat.
The feat would have some other benefit which could be a stat increase (making it a half-feat) or a specific benefit for TWF style builds, like one or two of those I suggested in the same post previously.
Hmm... going through the numbers, the rounding probably has to be rounded down. Otherwise a level 4 Fighter can pick up a racial ASI to make STR and DEX 16 each and an ASI on 4 to pick up the feat to effectively get +5 to attack and damage rolls. That's too much. Then it's a question whether there should be an exception to make it round up on Stat 20 - like a double down bonus to get that +3. Or the feat could be as is but have a prerequisite of a proficiency bonus +4 (PC lvl 9 with next ASI on PC lvl 12) or +5 (PC level 13 with next ASI on lvl 14 for a Fighter/16 everyone else). More likely it should only count for damage rolls and not attack rolls. It's not particularly balanced as is when you think about min/max.
For comparison a Wizard - Bladesinging at level 14 gets the ability to add their INT modifier to their damage rolls.
If you want to specifically make non-feat (non-investment) changes, I would focus on the core mechanic. Because it doesn't work particularly well with the other systems in the game and that's a major part of what is dragging the mechanic down, especially in the later stages. The two main culprits being the bonus action and the weapon swing damage.
There's a reason it is last on the list of ways to spend your bonus action: https://www.thegamer.com/dnd-dungeons-dragons-best-bonus-actions
This just enables 3 attacks with the primary weapon and 1 attack with your secondary weapon.
Attack Action: Attack once with each weapon. Primary, then secondary.
Bonus Action: Since you attacked with the secondary weapon your primary weapon is now an "other light weapon in your other hand" so you attack with it twice as your Bonus Action.
Primary Weapon x3. Secondary Weapon x1.
It is basically just the L11 Extra Attack feature from fighters but far more convoluted.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.