I am a 5th level fighter with an extra attack and I have TWF and dual wielding. In theory, could I use my first two attacks with a greatsword and then use my bonus attack with a long sword with my bonus action without being required to use my bonus action to unsheath my longsword and waiting to attack new turn? I read that I would only need two hands to use the greatsword not just hold it. So again, in theory, could I attack twice with a greatsword and use a free action to unsheath my longsword with the dual wield feat and use my bonus action to attack with the longsword in one turn?
No. The relevant text is here: "When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand. " The Dual Wielder feat says the weapons don't need to be Light, you still have to attack with a weapon you're holding in one hand. So attacking with a Greatsword would not trigger Two-Weapon Fighting. I suppose if you're at level 5, you might have an argument that you could attack once with a longsword two-handed, once once-handed, then draw another longsword and attack with it. But the damage boost from making the first attack two-handed is so small that it's not even worth adjudicating.
jd2319 is correct, you cannot do this. Two-weapon fighting explicitly requires that you be actually wielding two Lightone-handed melee weapons. If you have the Dual Wielder feat the weapons don't have to be light, but they do still have to be one-handed weapons.
Holding a Greatsword in one hand does not count as wielding it either, not that it would qualify to begin with.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
No. The relevant text is here: "When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand. " The Dual Wielder feat says the weapons don't need to be Light, you still have to attack with a weapon you're holding in one hand. So attacking with a Greatsword would not trigger Two-Weapon Fighting. I suppose if you're at level 5, you might have an argument that you could attack once with a longsword two-handed, once once-handed, then draw another longsword and attack with it. But the damage boost from making the first attack two-handed is so small that it's not even worth adjudicating.
Another way you could do it, for a slightly better damage boost, would be to attack with a greatsword, drop it, draw two longswords, attack with one of them, then attack with the other one as a bonus action. That requires Extra Attack (e.g. Fighter 5+) and the Dual Wielder feat, and does, on average, 2 more damage than just greatsword attacks (+str bonus damage if the character has the Two Weapon Fighting fighting style), can only be done one turn, and leaves you with a greatsword on the ground (which can be picked up or kicked away by the enemies).
Yeah i figured as much only way i could even slightly see that happening is with a pure strength check at a massive disadvantage but even then is it even worth. Thanks anyways.
Your questions would be better addressed in the Homebrew & House Rules sub-forum.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
No. The relevant text is here: "When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand. " The Dual Wielder feat says the weapons don't need to be Light, you still have to attack with a weapon you're holding in one hand. So attacking with a Greatsword would not trigger Two-Weapon Fighting. I suppose if you're at level 5, you might have an argument that you could attack once with a longsword two-handed, once once-handed, then draw another longsword and attack with it. But the damage boost from making the first attack two-handed is so small that it's not even worth adjudicating.
Another way you could do it, for a slightly better damage boost, would be to attack with a greatsword, drop it, draw two longswords, attack with one of them, then attack with the other one as a bonus action. That requires Extra Attack (e.g. Fighter 5+) and the Dual Wielder feat, and does, on average, 2 more damage than just greatsword attacks (+str bonus damage if the character has the Two Weapon Fighting fighting style), can only be done one turn, and leaves you with a greatsword on the ground (which can be picked up or kicked away by the enemies).
Definitely not worth it. =)
I would say no to this and here is why. The extra attack is not an extra action. So if your action is 'attack with the great sword' then in doing that you can't change the weapon as that changes the action. The extra attack is attached to the initial action, you can't change the action and still get the extra attack.
No. The relevant text is here: "When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand. " The Dual Wielder feat says the weapons don't need to be Light, you still have to attack with a weapon you're holding in one hand. So attacking with a Greatsword would not trigger Two-Weapon Fighting. I suppose if you're at level 5, you might have an argument that you could attack once with a longsword two-handed, once once-handed, then draw another longsword and attack with it. But the damage boost from making the first attack two-handed is so small that it's not even worth adjudicating.
Another way you could do it, for a slightly better damage boost, would be to attack with a greatsword, drop it, draw two longswords, attack with one of them, then attack with the other one as a bonus action. That requires Extra Attack (e.g. Fighter 5+) and the Dual Wielder feat, and does, on average, 2 more damage than just greatsword attacks (+str bonus damage if the character has the Two Weapon Fighting fighting style), can only be done one turn, and leaves you with a greatsword on the ground (which can be picked up or kicked away by the enemies).
Definitely not worth it. =)
I would say no to this and here is why. The extra attack is not an extra action. So if your action is 'attack with the great sword' then in doing that you can't change the weapon as that changes the action. The extra attack is attached to the initial action, you can't change the action and still get the extra attack.
That's how I would rule as the DM.
The action is "Attack", not "Attack with the greatsword". You can, for example, if holding a weapon in each hand, and having one Extra Attack, attack once with each weapon, using only your Action (and not your Bonus Action). This is standard. The Attack action does NOT tie you to a specific weapon.
Actually you can dual wield two handed weapons if you use mithral weapons.
Mithral weapons have the property that they are half the weight of a similar weapon made from normal metals. This makes it that one handed weapons get the light property while two handed weapons get the versatile property.
So if you were to combine two mithral two handed weapons with the dual wielder feat you would be able to dual wield using two handed weapons.
That is entirely homebrew. There are no official rules for mithral weapons.
Yes, you can do this, only if you have the Dual Wielder Feat, but you wouldn't be able to sheath the Longsword, unless your DM allows you to have extra actions to sheath and unsheath due to the description of The Dual Wielder Feat.
My DM would allow me to do it. I've TWFought with all three attacks, then sheathed to be able to cast Shield if i got hit later on in the Round before it was my turn again, then I would unsheathbmy off hand weapon then cast a Spell, then hit with off hand attack, leaving 1 hand free, then next time it's my turn, unsheath main weapon to make full attack then sheath 1 weapon.
Yes, you can do this, only if you have the Dual Wielder Feat, but you wouldn't be able to sheath the Longsword, unless your DM allows you to have extra actions to sheath and unsheath due to the description of The Dual Wielder Feat.
My DM would allow me to do it. I've TWFought with all three attacks, then sheathed to be able to cast Shield if i got hit later on in the Round before it was my turn again, then I would unsheathbmy off hand weapon then cast a Spell, then hit with off hand attack, leaving 1 hand free, then next time it's my turn, unsheath main weapon to make full attack then sheath 1 weapon.
This is how it's done
No, you cannot do this by either RAW or RAI. As has been pointed out already, TWF explicitly requires one-handed weapons. Since you are under the impression the Dual Wielder feat somehow allows it, allow me to show you why it doesn't.
You master fighting with two weapons, gaining the following benefits:
You gain a +1 bonus to AC while you are wieldinga separate melee weapon in each hand.
You can use two-weapon fighting even when the one handed melee weapons you are wielding aren't light.
You can draw or stow two one-handed weapons when you would normally be able to draw or stow only one.
1) Dual Wielder explicitly requires two weapons being wielded. Wielding a weapon is not simply holding a weapon, it's holding and being able to use the weapon. A Two-Handed weapon being held in one hand is not being wielded. You can't do anything with the weapon in that stance. It's a glorified anchor, unable to be used for offense or defense, when held in only one hand.
2) There is nothing in the Dual Wielder feat that causes a Two-Handed weapon to ever stop being a Two-Handed weapon. You just straight up cannot use a Two-Handed weapon to fulfill any requirement for TWF or features of the Dual Wielder feat, full stop.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
"Thus he came alone to Angband’s gates, and he sounded his horn, and smote once more upon the brazen doors, and challenged Morgoth to come forth to single combat. And Morgoth came."
Could a thri kreen dual wield a greatsword in their upper hands and a rapier or some other light weapon in one of the lower hands with the dual wielder feat?
Could a thri kreen dual wield a greatsword in their upper hands and a rapier or some other light weapon in one of the lower hands with the dual wielder feat?
That is legal. It still requires you to make at least one attack with the rapier in order to get the bonus action attack. But if you have two attacks (or more) then you can make one with the Greatsword and another with the rapier, allowing a bonus action attack with a third light weapon.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I am a 5th level fighter with an extra attack and I have TWF and dual wielding. In theory, could I use my first two attacks with a greatsword and then use my bonus attack with a long sword with my bonus action without being required to use my bonus action to unsheath my longsword and waiting to attack new turn? I read that I would only need two hands to use the greatsword not just hold it. So again, in theory, could I attack twice with a greatsword and use a free action to unsheath my longsword with the dual wield feat and use my bonus action to attack with the longsword in one turn?
No. The relevant text is here: "When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand. " The Dual Wielder feat says the weapons don't need to be Light, you still have to attack with a weapon you're holding in one hand. So attacking with a Greatsword would not trigger Two-Weapon Fighting. I suppose if you're at level 5, you might have an argument that you could attack once with a longsword two-handed, once once-handed, then draw another longsword and attack with it. But the damage boost from making the first attack two-handed is so small that it's not even worth adjudicating.
jd2319 is correct, you cannot do this. Two-weapon fighting explicitly requires that you be actually wielding two Light one-handed melee weapons. If you have the Dual Wielder feat the weapons don't have to be light, but they do still have to be one-handed weapons.
Holding a Greatsword in one hand does not count as wielding it either, not that it would qualify to begin with.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Another way you could do it, for a slightly better damage boost, would be to attack with a greatsword, drop it, draw two longswords, attack with one of them, then attack with the other one as a bonus action. That requires Extra Attack (e.g. Fighter 5+) and the Dual Wielder feat, and does, on average, 2 more damage than just greatsword attacks (+str bonus damage if the character has the Two Weapon Fighting fighting style), can only be done one turn, and leaves you with a greatsword on the ground (which can be picked up or kicked away by the enemies).
Definitely not worth it. =)
Ah dang well thanks for the insight
Yeah figured as much just try to cheese as much as possible thought i found a possible loophole oh well.. Thanks for the insight.
Yeah i figured as much only way i could even slightly see that happening is with a pure strength check at a massive disadvantage but even then is it even worth. Thanks anyways.
Your questions would be better addressed in the Homebrew & House Rules sub-forum.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Don't be the "drop the weapon" person. Just don't do it.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Oh i think I'm gonna be that guy 😈
Don't be that guy.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I would say no to this and here is why. The extra attack is not an extra action. So if your action is 'attack with the great sword' then in doing that you can't change the weapon as that changes the action. The extra attack is attached to the initial action, you can't change the action and still get the extra attack.
That's how I would rule as the DM.
The action is "Attack", not "Attack with the greatsword". You can, for example, if holding a weapon in each hand, and having one Extra Attack, attack once with each weapon, using only your Action (and not your Bonus Action). This is standard. The Attack action does NOT tie you to a specific weapon.
That is entirely homebrew. There are no official rules for mithral weapons.
Sorry, I wasn't sure if the sorce i used was homebrew or not. Thanks for clearing this up.
Yes, you can do this, only if you have the Dual Wielder Feat, but you wouldn't be able to sheath the Longsword, unless your DM allows you to have extra actions to sheath and unsheath due to the description of The Dual Wielder Feat.
My DM would allow me to do it. I've TWFought with all three attacks, then sheathed to be able to cast Shield if i got hit later on in the Round before it was my turn again, then I would unsheathbmy off hand weapon then cast a Spell, then hit with off hand attack, leaving 1 hand free, then next time it's my turn, unsheath main weapon to make full attack then sheath 1 weapon.
This is how it's done
No, you cannot do this by either RAW or RAI. As has been pointed out already, TWF explicitly requires one-handed weapons. Since you are under the impression the Dual Wielder feat somehow allows it, allow me to show you why it doesn't.
1) Dual Wielder explicitly requires two weapons being wielded. Wielding a weapon is not simply holding a weapon, it's holding and being able to use the weapon. A Two-Handed weapon being held in one hand is not being wielded. You can't do anything with the weapon in that stance. It's a glorified anchor, unable to be used for offense or defense, when held in only one hand.
2) There is nothing in the Dual Wielder feat that causes a Two-Handed weapon to ever stop being a Two-Handed weapon. You just straight up cannot use a Two-Handed weapon to fulfill any requirement for TWF or features of the Dual Wielder feat, full stop.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Be that guy.. be that guy for all of us who can't and wont..
"Thus he came alone to Angband’s gates, and he sounded his horn, and smote once more upon the brazen doors, and challenged Morgoth to come forth to single combat. And Morgoth came."
Could a thri kreen dual wield a greatsword in their upper hands and a rapier or some other light weapon in one of the lower hands with the dual wielder feat?
That is legal. It still requires you to make at least one attack with the rapier in order to get the bonus action attack. But if you have two attacks (or more) then you can make one with the Greatsword and another with the rapier, allowing a bonus action attack with a third light weapon.