About Dual Wielder + Nick (New perspective)

Quote from HarmAssassin >>

The benefit of the Dual Wielding feat is that the second weapon doesn't need to be light, and you can draw/stow two weapons at once (again reinforcing the idea that dual wielding is the wielding of a weapon in each hand at the same time).

I'd say in 5.5 the main mechanical benefit is an extra BA attack that stacks with Nick, although it does also allow for thematic rapier/dagger pairings and the like

It's still a pretty massive downgrade from the 5.0 version in terms of which weapons you can use though. No more barbarians with twin battle axes

Quote from Tarod_ >>

@Wayneland Yes, the Dual Wielder Bonus Action extra attack is triggered every time you attack with a Light weapon, including the one you shift into your Attack with Nick, or any extra attacks.

Some examples from another thread by Plaguescarred:

Quote from Plaguescarred >>

With a more liberal use of Nick Mastery, attack sequence can be: 

1. Shortsword attack [Attack Action] + Scimitar attack [Nick Mastery] → Scimitar attack [Dual Wielder]
2. Shortsword attack [Attack Action] + Scimitar attack [Nick Mastery] → Shortsword attack [Dual Wielder]
3. Scimitar attack [Attack Action] + Shortsword attack [Nick Mastery] → Scimitar attack [Dual Wielder]
4. Scimitar attack [Attack Action] + Shortsword attack [Nick Mastery] → Shortsword attack [Dual Wielder]

 

 I have a question about this.

I understand options 1 and 2.. but 3 and 4?

If you attack with a Scimitar as your main attack, the scimitar light properties does indeed give you the chance of using the BA for the other hand (short sword in this case). But the shortsword has not the nick property so how does it get squeezed in the main attack action thus freeing the BA for DW?

What is the reading of the rules that would allow this?

Also, can the BA attack be made inbetween the Main attack and the Nick attack of the attack actions? Meaning, can the BA attack "Interrupt" the attacks of the attack action?

Quote from Jayce_Danathar >>

If you attack with a Scimitar as your main attack, the scimitar light properties does indeed give you the chance of using the BA for the other hand (short sword in this case). But the shortsword has not the nick property so how does it get squeezed in the main attack action thus freeing the BA for DW?

The shortsword doesn't have the Nick mastery, but the Scimitar does. The Nick mastery is rather poorly written and doesn't actually specify which attack (the triggering attack or the Light property bonus attack) needs to be made with the Nick weapon. So, in actual play, people often rule that it can be either one as long as at least one of the weapons has Nick.

Quote from Jayce_Danathar >>

Also, can the BA attack be made inbetween the Main attack and the Nick attack of the attack actions? Meaning, can the BA attack "Interrupt" the attacks of the attack action?

There's been some debate about this. In chapter 1 of the Player's Handbook, there's a section called "One Thing at a Time" that indicates that you can't take an action in the middle of another action, and it's generally understood that this is meant to apply to bonus actions as well.

However, some people have pointed out that the definition of "bonus action" just after this in the same chapter says that you get to choose when to take a bonus action in your turn unless the specific bonus action says otherwise, and argue that this means you can choose to take it in the middle of an action if you want. I don't agree with this interpretation, but it's worth mentioning as a thing people have brought up.

Personally, I would be inclined to take it on a case-by-case basis depending on the specific action and bonus action we're talking about. In the case where both are just making a bunch of attacks, I'd probably allow you to interleave them, though I also think it's unlikely that that would ever make much difference in practice.

Quote from wagnarokkr >>

Quote from Jayce_Danathar >>

If you attack with a Scimitar as your main attack, the scimitar light properties does indeed give you the chance of using the BA for the other hand (short sword in this case). But the shortsword has not the nick property so how does it get squeezed in the main attack action thus freeing the BA for DW?

The shortsword doesn't have the Nick mastery, but the Scimitar does. The Nick mastery is rather poorly written and doesn't actually specify which attack (the triggering attack or the Light property bonus attack) needs to be made with the Nick weapon. So, in actual play, people often rule that it can be either one as long as at least one of the weapons has Nick.

Quote from Jayce_Danathar >>

Also, can the BA attack be made inbetween the Main attack and the Nick attack of the attack actions? Meaning, can the BA attack "Interrupt" the attacks of the attack action?

There's been some debate about this. In chapter 1 of the Player's Handbook, there's a section called "One Thing at a Time" that indicates that you can't take an action in the middle of another action, and it's generally understood that this is meant to apply to bonus actions as well.

However, some people have pointed out that the definition of "bonus action" just after this in the same chapter says that you get to choose when to take a bonus action in your turn unless the specific bonus action says otherwise, and argue that this means you can choose to take it in the middle of an action if you want. I don't agree with this interpretation, but it's worth mentioning as a thing people have brought up.

Personally, I would be inclined to take it on a case-by-case basis depending on the specific action and bonus action we're talking about. In the case where both are just making a bunch of attacks, I'd probably allow you to interleave them, though I also think it's unlikely that that would ever make much difference in practice.

The one case that comes to mind to me is Divine Smite. It is a bonus action you take immediately after hitting. If you are a Pal 5 and you hit both with the first attack and your extra attack, Divine Smite can go right in between your main attack and the extra attack or after the extra attack. 

 In the case where both are just making a bunch of attacks, I'd probably allow you to interleave them, though I also think it's unlikely that that would ever make much difference in practice.

Let say a high level padlock with pact of the blade has their 3 attacks with their pact weapon (a shortsword).

They also wields a dagger (nick).

They have the Dual Wielder feat and Two Weapon Fighting.

Their owl familiar gives them advantage on the first attack with the help action.

The logical sequence in my mind would be (assuming it is always the same target)

1. Shortsword attack [Main Attack with ADV from familiar Help] 
2. Shortsword attack [1st extra attack with ADV from Vex] 
3. Shortsword attack [2nd extra attack with ADV from Vex]  -->light property triggers the extra attack with the dagger.
4. Dagger attack [Nick Mastery attack with ADV from Vex] -->triggers the BA from Dual Wielder
5. Shortsword attack [Dual Wielder BA attack with no advantage]

In the next round the first attack against the attacker would be with ADV from Vex, without any need for the familiar help.

Although it is strange that a dual wielding fighting style would basically ensure only 1 hit with the second weapon, the rules are clear that the Dual Wielder BA attack needs to be with a different weapon from the one that triggers it. Also like this, 4 of 5 attacks get advantage from the main weapon, which is nice.

If BA can interrupt the attack action sequence, then it could also be

• Shortsword attack [Main Attack with ADV from familiar Help] 
• Shortsword attack [1st extra attack with ADV from Vex] -->
• Shortsword attack [2nd extra attack with ADV from Vex] -->triggers the BA from Dual Wielder AND light property triggers the extra attack with the dagger.
• Dagger attack [Dual Wielder BA attack with ADV from Vex]  
• Dagger attack [Nick Mastery attack with ADV from Vex] -->triggers the BA from Dual Wielder

This feels more like 2 weapons fighting, but it also is less optimized as in the following round you start without the advantage from vex.

I was wondering if there was a tidy way to optimize this sequence and have advantage on all 5 attacks. Right now the BA attack will always lack it.
EDIT: As an exercise, I posited a way to do it using 2 shortswords (A and B) and a dagger.. but this weapon juggling sounds a bit inelegant. 

• Equips shortsword A on right hand and shortsword B on left hand. Shortsword A attack [Main Attack with ADV from familiar Help] 
• Shortsword A attack [1st extra attack with ADV from Vex] -->
• Shortsword A attack [2nd extra attack with ADV from Vex] -->triggers the BA from Dual Wielder AND light property triggers the extra attack with the dagger. Stows Shortsword A freeing the right hand. 
• Shortsword B attack [Dual Wielder BA attack with ADV from Vex]  
• Equips Dagger in right hand.  Dagger attack [Nick Mastery attack with ADV from Vex] -->triggers the BA from Dual Wielder
• Free object interaction. Unequips dagger freeing the right hand. 

Quote from Jayce_Danathar >>

I was wondering if there was a way to optimize this sequence and have advantage on all 5 attacks. Right now in any way I see it, the BA attack will always lack it.

 Depends on how your table plays Nick. If you read it as the Nick weapon has to be used for the enabling attack, then you can lead with the dagger, enable both the Light and DW attacks off that, and make both with the shortsword.

If you read it as the Nick weapon has to be used to make the Light extra attack, then no.

Interesting.

Could you elaborate on that a bit more please? 

Because when I play this out one attack (the second) still ends up lacking vex.

• Dagger attack [Main Attack with ADV from familiar Help] -->triggers the BA from Dual Wielder AND light property triggers the extra attack with the dagger.
• Shortsword attack [Nick Mastery attack with no Advantage] 
• Shortsword attack [2nd extra attack with ADV from Vex] 
• Shortsword attack [2nd extra attack with ADV from Vex] 
• Shortsword attack [Dual Wielder BA attack with no advantage]

Can the warlock pact of the blade 2 extra attacks (thirsting and devouring blade) be triggered with the short sword if the first short sword attack is itself the extra attack from the nick property?

Quote from Jayce_Danathar>>

Interesting.

Could you elaborate on that a bit more please? 

Because when I play this out one attack (the second) still ends up lacking vex.

• Dagger attack [Main Attack with ADV from familiar Help] -->triggers the BA from Dual Wielder AND light property triggers the extra attack with the dagger.
• Shortsword attack [Nick Mastery attack with no Advantage] 
• Shortsword attack [2nd extra attack with ADV from Vex] 
• Shortsword attack [2nd extra attack with ADV from Vex] 
• Shortsword attack [Dual Wielder BA attack with no advantage]

Can the warlock pact of the blade 2 extra attacks (thirsting and devouring blade) be triggered with the short sword if the first short sword attack is itself the extra attack from the nick property?

 The extra attacks you get from the invocations are an inherent property of the attack action -- you take the Attack action, you get three attacks because you have those abilities.

Quote from Jayce_Danathar >>

[...] The one case that comes to mind to me is Divine Smite. It is a bonus action you take immediately after hitting. If you are a Pal 5 and you hit both with the first attack and your extra attack, Divine Smite can go right in between your main attack and the extra attack or after the extra attack.  [...]

 Some other examples could be Flurry of Blows, the Heavy Weapon Master benefit from the Great Weapon Master feat, the Pole Strike benefit from the Polearm Master feat, the Barbarian's Travel Along the Tree, or the Rogue's Steady Aim.

I read One Thing at a Time as it applies to the main Actions (a previous paragraph in the rules), while still allowing Bonus Actions and Reactions to be used in the middle of other actions "unless the Bonus Action's timing is specified" or "unless the Reaction's description says otherwise".

Basically, this seems fine to me if you have Extra Attacks: Attack #1 --> Bonus Action (Flurry of Blows/Pole Strike/Steady Aim, for example) --> Attack #2.

Anyway, as wagnarokkr said, I'm one of the people who have brought this up before :) I also recognize that it's debatable in some cases (I'd say not for Smites) and is something to discuss with your DM.

Quote from jl8e>>

Quote from Jayce_Danathar>>

Interesting.

Could you elaborate on that a bit more please? 

Because when I play this out one attack (the second) still ends up lacking vex.

You're right; I just screwed up.

Since you must make an attack without vex every round, there's no way not to break the chain, unless you can get advantage from an external source every round.

 It would work if there was a way to follow this order.

1 Shortsword

2 Shortsword

3 Shortsword

4 Shortsword

5 Dagger

I don't think you can though 🤔

Quote from wagnarokkr >>

Quote from Jayce_Danathar >>

If you attack with a Scimitar as your main attack, the scimitar light properties does indeed give you the chance of using the BA for the other hand (short sword in this case). But the shortsword has not the nick property so how does it get squeezed in the main attack action thus freeing the BA for DW?

The shortsword doesn't have the Nick mastery, but the Scimitar does. The Nick mastery is rather poorly written and doesn't actually specify which attack (the triggering attack or the Light property bonus attack) needs to be made with the Nick weapon. So, in actual play, people often rule that it can be either one as long as at least one of the weapons has Nick.

Quote from Jayce_Danathar >>

Also, can the BA attack be made inbetween the Main attack and the Nick attack of the attack actions? Meaning, can the BA attack "Interrupt" the attacks of the attack action?

There's been some debate about this. In chapter 1 of the Player's Handbook, there's a section called "One Thing at a Time" that indicates that you can't take an action in the middle of another action, and it's generally understood that this is meant to apply to bonus actions as well.

However, some people have pointed out that the definition of "bonus action" just after this in the same chapter says that you get to choose when to take a bonus action in your turn unless the specific bonus action says otherwise, and argue that this means you can choose to take it in the middle of an action if you want. I don't agree with this interpretation, but it's worth mentioning as a thing people have brought up.

Personally, I would be inclined to take it on a case-by-case basis depending on the specific action and bonus action we're talking about. In the case where both are just making a bunch of attacks, I'd probably allow you to interleave them, though I also think it's unlikely that that would ever make much difference in practice.

I just wanted to point out that while restricting BA timing might be the general consensus here, on their Discord Rules channel the consensus is much more in the other direction: that is, that a BA is not an "action" as described in the OTAAT section of the rules and can, therefore, be placed anywhere unless it has specific timing.

Food for thought.