when you make your main attack (with a light weapon) you add your to hit and damage bonus, On your second (also light weapon) it says nothing is added for damage....does that mean you can add the to hit bonus or no?
The rules for two-weapon fighting only talk about changing the way you calculate the damage. Attack rolls are unchanged. 5E rules are a lot like weddings in the Princess Bride. If it doesn't say it, it doesn't do it. :)
Sorry to resurrect a thread but I would like to make sure I have the facts straight.
I have a Bard Character, Cadenza. He is newly level 2 with the following attributes: Str 10, Dex 14, Wis 12, Int 10, Con 14, Chr 16. He has a rapier and a dagger and his pockets are full of cash. I am asking if I should buy two short swords. He has the Two Weapon Fighting Action available to him.
If I attack with the rapier, I may not use two weapon fighting, although I can say I am fighting with a rapier in one hand and the dagger in the other for Roleplay, but it has no effect in-game. But it appears I could opt to buy two short swords and benefit from my two weapon fighting action.
Case 1: Rapier and Dagger - I roll once for to-hit and I use my +2 proficiency and my +2 Dex bonus, and if I get a hit I roll 1d8+2 Dex for damage
Case 2: Short Sword (x2) - I roll once for to-hit and I use my +2 proficiency and my +2 Dex bonus, and if I get a hit I roll 1d6+2 Dex for damage …
then I roll a second time for to-hit using only my +2 Dex bonus, and if I get a hit I roll 1d6+2 Dex for damage
Do I have the details straight? We didn't use two weapon fighting in AD&D days.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
In neither case would you get the damage bonus on your offhand attack.
There's regular ol' Two Weapon Fighting that everyone is capable of. You don't get the damage bonus.
Then there's the Fighting Style - Two Weapon Fighting - that martial characters can take. That's what allows them to add the modifier to damage. Bards don't get a fighting style, so you fall into the first category.
Regular Two-Weapon Fighting Rules in Chapter 9, for everyone: if you attack with a LIGHT melee weapon in your main hand, you may also attack with a LIGHT melee weapon in your off hand. Both attacks have the normal to-hit bonus (proficiency bonus if you are proficient with the weapon, Strength or Dexterity bonus depending on whether it is a regular or finesse weapon), but only the main weapon is allowed to add +Str/Dex to the damage roll.
So if a 1st level character with 14 Str/Dex attacked with a Short Sword in their main hand, that would be a +4 attack and 1d6+2 damage. They could then make an off-hand TWF attack as a bonus action with another Short Sword at +4 attack and 1d6+0 damage. If they had attacked with a non-light weapon (such as a Rapier), they would not be able to make a Bonus Action attack with the weapon held in their other hand.
The Two-Weapon Fighting fighting style that some classes provide: when you make a valid TWF Bonus Attack (normally a light weapon, after making an attack with a light weapon held in your main hand), you can add your Str/Dex to the damage roll.
So if a 1st level character with 14 Str/Dex and the TWF fighting style attacked with a short sword in their main hand, that would be a +4 attack with 1d6+2 damage. They could then make an off-hand TWF attack as a bonus action with another Short Sword at +4 attack and 1d6+2 damage. If they had attacked with a non-light weapon (such as a Rapier), they would not be able to make a Bonus Action attack with the weapon held in their other hand.
The Dual Wielder feat: the LIGHT restriction is removed from TWF, so any one-handed melee weapons will work.
So if a 1st level character with 14 Str/Dex and the Dual Wielder feat attacked with a one-handed weapon in their main hand (such as a Rapier), that would be a +4 attack with 1d8+2 damage (or whatever that weapon's damage die is). They could then make an off-hand TWF attack as a bonus action with another one-handed weapon like a Rapier at +4 attack and 1d8+0 damage.
If a 1st level character with 14 Str/Dex and the Dual Wielder feat and the TWF fighting style attacked with a Rapier, that would be a +4 attack with 1d8+2 damage. They could then make an off-hand TWF attack as a bonus action with another Rapier for +4 attack and 1d8+2 damage.
Case 2: Short Sword (x2) - I roll once for to-hit and I use my +2 proficiency and my +2 Dex bonus, and if I get a hit I roll 1d6+2 Dex for damage …
then I roll a second time for to-hit using only my +2 Dex bonus, and if I get a hit I roll 1d6 for damage
Do I have the details straight? We didn't use two weapon fighting in AD&D days.
So to clarify, this is how Case Two would work.
IF you could pick up a martial character's "Two Weapon Fighting Style" you could add DEX to the off-hand attack.
IF you pick up the Dual Wielder Feat you could attack with the rapier in the main hand and bonus action attack with a dagger in the off hand, but you still wouldn't be able to add DEX to the dagger's damage.
Mostly correct. Dual Wielder allows any one handed weapon in either or both hands (not just main hand)
Two-Weapon Fighting (the fighting style) allows you to add your ability modifier to damage rolls for the bonus action attack with the offhand weapon Dual Wielder (the feat) allows you to fight with any one-handed weapon, in either or both hands (as opposed to light only weapons). You can do rapier / rapier rather than rapier / dagger.
Sorry to resurrect a thread but I would like to make sure I have the facts straight.
I have a Bard Character, Cadenza. He is newly level 2 with the following attributes: Str 10, Dex 14, Wis 12, Int 10, Con 14, Chr 16. He has a rapier and a dagger and his pockets are full of cash. I am asking if I should buy two short swords. He has the Two Weapon Fighting Action available to him.
If I attack with the rapier, I may not use two weapon fighting, although I can say I am fighting with a rapier in one hand and the dagger in the other for Roleplay, but it has no effect in-game. But it appears I could opt to buy two short swords and benefit from my two weapon fighting action.
Case 1: Rapier and Dagger - I roll once for to-hit and I use my +2 proficiency and my +2 Dex bonus, and if I get a hit I roll 1d8+2 Dex for damage
Case 2: Short Sword (x2) - I roll once for to-hit and I use my +2 proficiency and my +2 Dex bonus, and if I get a hit I roll 1d6+2 Dex for damage …
then I roll a second time for to-hit using only my +2 Dex bonus, and if I get a hit I roll 1d6+2 Dex for damage
Do I have the details straight? We didn't use two weapon fighting in AD&D days.
No need to apologize, this is the exact reason these threads stay unlocked.
You almost got it right, case two would actually work like this:
”Case 2: Short Sword (x2) - I roll once for to-hit and I use my +2 proficiency and my +2 Dex bonus, and if I get a hit I roll 1d6+2 Dex for damage …
then I roll a second time for to-hit using my +2 proficiency and my +2 Dex bonus, and if I get a hit I roll 1d6 for damage.”
As others have mentioned, Two-Weapon Fighting and Dual Wielder feat would alter things a bit.
As a side note, when two-weapon fighting you get to choose whichever of the two weapons you want for the main attack every turn. For the once-in-an-every-great-while that it still make a difference in 5e, I usually go with Shortsword and Scimitar because then it gives me the option of damage types. It’s extremely rare anymore, but every once in a while....
Thanks. I considered the Scimitar option because the DM gave us an encounter where the loot included scimitars. But my Bard is not proficient with a scimitar, so … But I should keep an eye out for an opportunity to include different damage types, you're right about that. I went up against zombies and skeletons in my first encounter and skellys have resistance to piercing and slashing. I decided to fight with two torches doing bludgeoning damage with improvised weapons. My party needed light but Cadenza is naturally a half-elf with dark vision.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
Basically, with 2 shortswords you would make 1 attack action for 1d6+2 and 1 attack bonus action for 1d6. Totaling 2d6+2, 9 average.
With 1 rapier you can make 1 attack action for 1d8+2 damage, average 6.5.
Something to consider is you only get the extra 2.5 damage when you use both your action and bonus action to attack. Bards can use their bonus action to give inspiration.
A sword bard can pick up 2 weapon fighting style at level 3.
Yeah, that too bad. I always think that any class that gets proficiency in the Shortsword should also get proficiency in the Scimitar.
Yeah the difference in these weapons are weird. Mechanically, the only difference is damage type, everything else is the same. But the scimitar costs 15gp more and weighs an extra pound. And like you pointed out proficiency in shortswords is more readily given.
Yeah, that too bad. I always think that any class that gets proficiency in the Shortsword should also get proficiency in the Scimitar.
Yeah the difference in these weapons are weird. Mechanically, the only difference is damage type, everything else is the same. But the scimitar costs 15gp more and weighs an extra pound. And like you pointed out proficiency in shortswords is more readily given.
I always thought of the short sword as analogous to a roman gladius, which was used as a stabbing weapon (piercing damage). Of course the long sword is considered the typical knight's one handed weapon, different from the two-handed sword such as the Scots Claymore. Curved swords were developed to fight against shield by allowing the fighter to stab over or around the shield. I don't really know what the typical naval sword (the long slightly curved sword with a substantial hand guard) was developed to do. I always thought of that as a slashing weapon like the cavalry sabers used in the Napoleonic Era.
The damage values all seem to be indexed to weapon length.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
Yeah, that too bad. I always think that any class that gets proficiency in the Shortsword should also get proficiency in the Scimitar.
Yeah the difference in these weapons are weird. Mechanically, the only difference is damage type, everything else is the same. But the scimitar costs 15gp more and weighs an extra pound. And like you pointed out proficiency in shortswords is more readily given.
What is so special about slashing damage?
Nothing substantial in 5e.
Except maybe that slashing will split an ooze when piercing & bludgeoning won't. That's enough to make me think about swinging a warhammer instead of a battleaxe :)
I always thought of the short sword as analogous to a roman gladius, which was used as a stabbing weapon (piercing damage). Of course the long sword is considered the typical knight's one handed weapon, different from the two-handed sword such as the Scots Claymore. Curved swords were developed to fight against shield by allowing the fighter to stab over or around the shield. I don't really know what the typical naval sword (the long slightly curved sword with a substantial hand guard) was developed to do. I always thought of that as a slashing weapon like the cavalry sabers used in the Napoleonic Era.
The damage values all seem to be indexed to weapon length.
A Shortsword could be analogous to a Roman Gladius, an Italian Side-sword, or any other short thrusting weapon. A Longsword was so named because it had a longer grip specially so it could be wielded with either one hand or two, sometimes referred to as a “Bastard Sword” or a “Hand-and-a-Half Sword.” The “one-handed knight’s” sword you are referring to was called an “Arming Sword” and the 5e equivalent would be a one-handed 1d8 weapon like a Rapier without finesse, or a Longsword without versatile. It currently does not exist in 5e because mechanically there is no reason for it. Curved swords like a Scimitar or Saber have an advantage at cutting, specifically against lighter armored opponents. The main advantage is for mounted combatants because it allows a rider to attack at speed and the curved shape helps to prevent the weapon from getting stuck in the opponent and yanked from the wielder’s hand as they rode by. In D&D 5e a Saber would be like a Rapier that does slashing damage instead of piercing. That naval sword you are referring to, like a Cutlass, was designed to be short enough to swing without getting fouled in a ship’s rigging, but also heavy enough to chop through ropes quickly to defend against boarding actions with grappling hooks. And most hand-to-hand naval combat was against lightly armored foes since armor makes it hard to climb/swim. A Scimitar and a Cutlass would use the same D&D stats.
I believe the cavalry saber was curved to help the rider draw the sword without injuring his horse.
A Rapier is much lighter weapon than the weapon you call an Arming Sword. I think a Rapier is only slightly lighter than the Ceremonial Sword from my days in the army. A Rapier is a bit more substantial than a Foil used in fencing, the day-to-day weapon of a "gentleman" in Renaissance Europe.
I always believed scimitars were more substantial than the cavalry saber. I presume this was to put more force behind the blow allowing a mounted warrior to cleave his opponent's horse.
Would it be too much of a stretch to consider the short sword (and the dagger) as both a piercing and slashing weapon? I think that is reasonable. Although, I do know the Roman army trained their soldiers to use their sword as a thrusting, piercing weapon.
when you make your main attack (with a light weapon) you add your to hit and damage bonus, On your second (also light weapon) it says nothing is added for damage....does that mean you can add the to hit bonus or no?
You still add your hit modifier. It is weaker, but equally accurate.
The two weapon fighting style lets you add your damage modifier.
Thanks! That is what I thought after reading it but wanted to make sure.
The character in question is an Elf Ranger so he will be an archer fighting style but will use a pair of short swords for 'up close' work.
Thanks again.
The rules for two-weapon fighting only talk about changing the way you calculate the damage. Attack rolls are unchanged. 5E rules are a lot like weddings in the Princess Bride. If it doesn't say it, it doesn't do it. :)
Sorry to resurrect a thread but I would like to make sure I have the facts straight.
I have a Bard Character, Cadenza. He is newly level 2 with the following attributes: Str 10, Dex 14, Wis 12, Int 10, Con 14, Chr 16. He has a rapier and a dagger and his pockets are full of cash. I am asking if I should buy two short swords. He has the Two Weapon Fighting Action available to him.
If I attack with the rapier, I may not use two weapon fighting, although I can say I am fighting with a rapier in one hand and the dagger in the other for Roleplay, but it has no effect in-game. But it appears I could opt to buy two short swords and benefit from my two weapon fighting action.
Case 1: Rapier and Dagger - I roll once for to-hit and I use my +2 proficiency and my +2 Dex bonus, and if I get a hit I roll 1d8+2 Dex for damage
Case 2: Short Sword (x2) - I roll once for to-hit and I use my +2 proficiency and my +2 Dex bonus, and if I get a hit I roll 1d6+2 Dex for damage …
then I roll a second time for to-hit using only my +2 Dex bonus, and if I get a hit I roll 1d6+2 Dex for damage
Do I have the details straight? We didn't use two weapon fighting in AD&D days.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
In neither case would you get the damage bonus on your offhand attack.
There's regular ol' Two Weapon Fighting that everyone is capable of. You don't get the damage bonus.
Then there's the Fighting Style - Two Weapon Fighting - that martial characters can take. That's what allows them to add the modifier to damage. Bards don't get a fighting style, so you fall into the first category.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
So to clarify, this is how Case Two would work.
IF you could pick up a martial character's "Two Weapon Fighting Style" you could add DEX to the off-hand attack.
IF you pick up the Dual Wielder Feat you could attack with the rapier in the main hand and bonus action attack with a dagger in the off hand, but you still wouldn't be able to add DEX to the dagger's damage.
Mostly correct. Dual Wielder allows any one handed weapon in either or both hands (not just main hand)
Two-Weapon Fighting (the fighting style) allows you to add your ability modifier to damage rolls for the bonus action attack with the offhand weapon
Dual Wielder (the feat) allows you to fight with any one-handed weapon, in either or both hands (as opposed to light only weapons). You can do rapier / rapier rather than rapier / dagger.
Site Info: Wizard's ToS | Fan Content Policy | Forum Rules | Physical Books | Content Not Working | Contact Support
How To: Homebrew Rules | Create Homebrew | Snippet Codes | Tool Tips (Custom) | Rollables (Generator)
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Feats | Spells | Magic Items
Other: Beyond20 | Page References | Other Guides | Entitlements | Dice Randomization | Images Fix | FAQ
No need to apologize, this is the exact reason these threads stay unlocked.
You almost got it right, case two would actually work like this:
”Case 2: Short Sword (x2) - I roll once for to-hit and I use my +2 proficiency and my +2 Dex bonus, and if I get a hit I roll 1d6+2 Dex for damage …
then I roll a second time for to-hit using my +2 proficiency and my +2 Dex bonus, and if I get a hit I roll 1d6 for damage.”
As others have mentioned, Two-Weapon Fighting and Dual Wielder feat would alter things a bit.
As a side note, when two-weapon fighting you get to choose whichever of the two weapons you want for the main attack every turn. For the once-in-an-every-great-while that it still make a difference in 5e, I usually go with Shortsword and Scimitar because then it gives me the option of damage types. It’s extremely rare anymore, but every once in a while....
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Thanks. I considered the Scimitar option because the DM gave us an encounter where the loot included scimitars. But my Bard is not proficient with a scimitar, so … But I should keep an eye out for an opportunity to include different damage types, you're right about that. I went up against zombies and skeletons in my first encounter and skellys have resistance to piercing and slashing. I decided to fight with two torches doing bludgeoning damage with improvised weapons. My party needed light but Cadenza is naturally a half-elf with dark vision.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
Basically, with 2 shortswords you would make 1 attack action for 1d6+2 and 1 attack bonus action for 1d6. Totaling 2d6+2, 9 average.
With 1 rapier you can make 1 attack action for 1d8+2 damage, average 6.5.
Something to consider is you only get the extra 2.5 damage when you use both your action and bonus action to attack. Bards can use their bonus action to give inspiration.
A sword bard can pick up 2 weapon fighting style at level 3.
Yeah, that too bad. I always think that any class that gets proficiency in the Shortsword should also get proficiency in the Scimitar.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Yeah the difference in these weapons are weird. Mechanically, the only difference is damage type, everything else is the same. But the scimitar costs 15gp more and weighs an extra pound. And like you pointed out proficiency in shortswords is more readily given.
What is so special about slashing damage?
Nothing substantial in 5e.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I always thought of the short sword as analogous to a roman gladius, which was used as a stabbing weapon (piercing damage). Of course the long sword is considered the typical knight's one handed weapon, different from the two-handed sword such as the Scots Claymore. Curved swords were developed to fight against shield by allowing the fighter to stab over or around the shield. I don't really know what the typical naval sword (the long slightly curved sword with a substantial hand guard) was developed to do. I always thought of that as a slashing weapon like the cavalry sabers used in the Napoleonic Era.
The damage values all seem to be indexed to weapon length.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
Except maybe that slashing will split an ooze when piercing & bludgeoning won't. That's enough to make me think about swinging a warhammer instead of a battleaxe :)
This is turning into Spear vs Trident all over again...
A Shortsword could be analogous to a Roman Gladius, an Italian Side-sword, or any other short thrusting weapon. A Longsword was so named because it had a longer grip specially so it could be wielded with either one hand or two, sometimes referred to as a “Bastard Sword” or a “Hand-and-a-Half Sword.” The “one-handed knight’s” sword you are referring to was called an “Arming Sword” and the 5e equivalent would be a one-handed 1d8 weapon like a Rapier without finesse, or a Longsword without versatile. It currently does not exist in 5e because mechanically there is no reason for it. Curved swords like a Scimitar or Saber have an advantage at cutting, specifically against lighter armored opponents. The main advantage is for mounted combatants because it allows a rider to attack at speed and the curved shape helps to prevent the weapon from getting stuck in the opponent and yanked from the wielder’s hand as they rode by. In D&D 5e a Saber would be like a Rapier that does slashing damage instead of piercing. That naval sword you are referring to, like a Cutlass, was designed to be short enough to swing without getting fouled in a ship’s rigging, but also heavy enough to chop through ropes quickly to defend against boarding actions with grappling hooks. And most hand-to-hand naval combat was against lightly armored foes since armor makes it hard to climb/swim. A Scimitar and a Cutlass would use the same D&D stats.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I believe the cavalry saber was curved to help the rider draw the sword without injuring his horse.
A Rapier is much lighter weapon than the weapon you call an Arming Sword. I think a Rapier is only slightly lighter than the Ceremonial Sword from my days in the army. A Rapier is a bit more substantial than a Foil used in fencing, the day-to-day weapon of a "gentleman" in Renaissance Europe.
I always believed scimitars were more substantial than the cavalry saber. I presume this was to put more force behind the blow allowing a mounted warrior to cleave his opponent's horse.
Would it be too much of a stretch to consider the short sword (and the dagger) as both a piercing and slashing weapon? I think that is reasonable. Although, I do know the Roman army trained their soldiers to use their sword as a thrusting, piercing weapon.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt