Dual wielding is a staple of fantasy, but it is no secret that dual wielding is a bit on the weak side in Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition. It is not an awful playstyle in low lvl play, but it is inefficient compared to two-handed weapons from lvl 5 onwards in virtually all cases. Barbarians wielding two-handed weapons are also generally more efficient than dual wielders from lvl 2 onwards, due to Reckless Attack.
Dictionary
TWF - Two-weapon fighting / dual wielding
Dmg - damage
DPR - Damage per round
PAM - Polearm Master
GWM - Great Weapon Master
WotC - Wizards of the Coast
BA - Bonus Action
Lvl - Level
APR - Attacks Per Round / Multiattack / Extra Attack
ASI - Ability Score Increase / Feat
Goals
When building an effective TWF character, there are 4 main requirements to look for:
Good damage per round. WotC made TWF a DPR playstyle when they made the fighting style add damage and gave it limited feat support.
Primarily being a TWF character instead of a character that happens to use TWF.
Not immediately beaten by PAM in its own build. PAM gives both a BA attack and an engagement attack, which means that any build that can both use TWF and PAM will be stronger with PAM.
The build should, ideally, be able to do more than just damage. Utility, skills etc. are all valuable in tabletop RPGs and will likely make for a better player experience.
Why #3?
If a TWF build has roughly the same dmg as PAM would with the same basic build, wouldn’t that be good enough? Kinda, if you want it to. The problem is that PAM synergizes with a number of other feats, fighting styles and classes beyond what TWF can, greatly diversifying its options. PAM+Sentinel, for example, is a staple combination that deals both good dmg and can drastically impact combat via control.
In short, if you’re in a build where you can pick between TWF and PAM, not choosing PAM is a massive opportunity cost. What we are looking for isn’t just a decent building using TWF, but rather a build where TWF is an important part of it.
Possible classes
There are 4 classes that have some form of inherent access to, or benefit from, TWF, so let's take a look at those.
College of Swords Bards
If you want a good TWF character, a Swords Bard will go a long way, but it runs afoul of #2 on our list of goals. Swords Bards are spellswords who happen to use TWF, and their strength typically lies in their spellcasting more than their martial abilities. A Swords Bard will dual wield largely because it is the option they have freely available to them and investing in anything else is expensive for a class that wants to max out Charisma and pick up the Warcaster feat as soon as possible.
Highly recommended, but not the build we’re looking for.
Rogues
Most Rogues who go melee, with the exception of Arcane Tricksters and those with the Magic Initiate feat, will tend to use TWF. Like the Swords Bard, this is partially rooted in a lack of other options without a significant investment, but there are legitimate benefits to TWF for Rogues. They don’t get the TWF fighting style, but they benefit from having an additional chance to trigger their Sneak Attack ability. They are also incapable of using Sneak Attack with PAM or GWM.
That being said, Rogues do tend to scale a bit slowly on the damage front, especially after lvl the martial classes get Extra Attack at lvl 5.
Arcane Tricksters and Magic Initiate Rogues, however, rarely use TWF because they want to use Booming Blade and a Familiar for the help action (I recommend an owl familiar) and these builds are generally the strongest Rogues.
Fighters
Fighters, initially, seem to be good candidates for a TWF build and they will do a bit better than most. 4 APR, TWF style, and access to all weapons and armor. But TWF Fighters don’t only have a problem competing with PAM Fighters, but also any Fighter who picks up a decent two-handed weapon. A high DPR favors every fighting style more than TWF, since TWF benefits are nearly static.
Ranger
As the final option with access to TWF style, the Rangers have been associated with TWF since 2nd edition at the earliest and they were some of the strongest TWF characters in 3rd edition. Unfortunately, even the Ranger synergizes better with PAM than TWF because there is nothing in the Ranger class that does not work with heavy weapons.
The Solution
So what is the solution for making a good TWF build? It’s simple: Multiclassing. Specifically a Fighter/Rogue or Ranger/Rogue multiclass.
TWF is a decent option on its own at lvls 1-4 and doesn't fall behind until APR starts to go up. It’s once we hit lvl 5 that the problem of TWF dmg begins to show and we need something to boost it going forward. Even the Ranger’s spellcasting can only go so far to help. We do, however, still want to get the Extra Attack feature since it is a nice dmg boost for a TWF build as well.
The easy answer is this: Fighter or Ranger lvl 5 -> Rogue lvl 15
It isn’t overly important which archetypes you pick, but I would call out Gloom Stalker->Arcane Trickster and Battlemaster->Swashbuckler as particularly effective options.
Even just looking at the basics, without considering anything beyond TWF style, Extra Attack and Sneak Attack, it does pretty well compared to baseline (see section on basic damage calculations). This means that we have satisfied #1 on the list of goals; having a character that does pretty good damage at all points in the game.
We fulfill #2 on the list because this is a build that is primarily a dual wielder in combat, even though they will have many options for how to spend their BA should they not need that extra attack on that turn. This flexibility will benefit even a Ranger, since sometimes it is more important to reposition than attack to maximize DPR.
#3 on the list is a problem for a lot of builds, but not this one. Since we scale much of our damage with Sneak Attack, we don’t have to compete with PAM (or GWM) at all, since they aren’t compatible with Sneak Attack.
And, finally, #4: Seeing as we have Rogue as part of our multiclass, there is no denying that we will be able to contribute meaningfully outside of combat as well.
Bonus Build: Drizzt
Ever wanted to play Drizzt do’Urden, but been disappointed that dual wielding wasn’t all that badass in 5e? Here’s a simple build for the iconic Drow for 5e mechanics!
Last I looked, Drizzt was usually depicted as a lvl 16 character, so let’s go with that.
5: Spells: Pass Without Trace. Possibly swap one of your 1st lvl spells for another 2nd lvl spell. Summon Beast is an option as a variant on Guenhwyvar, even though the panther is technically from a Figurine of Wondrous Power.
6: Pick 1 skill from the Rogue list and pick 2 from all your skills (or your newly gained Thieves’ Tools proficiency) to get Expertise in. You should match these to your campaign.
8: Swashbuckler
9: +2 Dex (20)
11: 2 more choices for Expertise.
13: ASI: I would recommend building Constitution from here on out, since this is a melee build, unless there is a feat you really want first.
15: ASI
16:
Drizzt isn’t that much of a spellcaster, so I picked Ranger spells that are not very flashy, even though they can be really good. As far as I know, he is only ever shown using Drow Racial Magic, so spells that can be incorporated into being part of his skills as a swordsman (Zephyr Strike) or Ranger (everything else I suggested) work the best.
I chose Hunter with Colossus Slayer for its simplicity, but there are a myriad of options for other Ranger archetypes. Gloom Stalker is a fantastic option for powergaming. Swashbuckler should be obvious; it’s the swordmaster of the Rogues!
Why no Dual Wielder feat? 2 reasons: 1) I don’t think it offers enough value unless your DM is really obnoxious about following the RAW “draw 1 weapon” as part of your other action, and 2) scimitars are already light and finessable weapons.
Basic damage calculation vs Baseline
Baseline is defined as a Warlock using Eldritch Blast + Agonizing Blast + Hex and Charisma being 16 at lvl 2, 18 at lvl 4, and 20 at lvl 8.
Numbers shown with a base 65% chance to hit. Sneak Attack, added from lvl 6 onwards, has its own chance to hit since it can trigger on any of the 3 attacks the character has. With 3 chances to hit, a base 65% chance to hit gives Sneak Attack a 95,7125% chance to trigger (0,957125). Or, simplified, each 1d6 of Sneak Attack increases DPR by 3,3499375.
We are not looking at Action Surge, Umbral Sight, Dread Ambusher, Battlemaster maneuvers, spells, magic weapons or anything else that might increase TWF DPR. This is just comparing our build when it is just using TWF+Sneak Attack with stat neutral weapons to baseline. The actual damage potential of a TWF build will be higher than this. We are also not looking at crits, which also favors TWF through Sneak Attack.
We are not looking at Action Surge, Umbral Sight, Dread Ambusher, Battlemaster maneuvers, spells,
Because you are not including things like this in the comparisons your conclusions will be skewed. These are principal functionalities in the classes you describe and directly affect what you are intending to evaluate.
We are not looking at Action Surge, Umbral Sight, Dread Ambusher, Battlemaster maneuvers, spells,
Because you are not including things like this in the comparisons your conclusions will be skewed. These are principal functionalities in the classes you describe and directly affect what you are intending to evaluate.
I think my point comes across fairly straightforwardly; here is the minimum DPR you can expect regardless of how you build this character, which compared favorably to baseline at most levels. I explicitly state the actual damage will likely be higher.
We are not looking at Action Surge, Umbral Sight, Dread Ambusher, Battlemaster maneuvers, spells,
Because you are not including things like this in the comparisons your conclusions will be skewed. These are principal functionalities in the classes you describe and directly affect what you are intending to evaluate.
I think that the point is to show that the build remains competitive with EB with AB, hex and a predetermined charisma level at each level without having to resort to using those options, the significance of which is sustained DPR that assures viability without concern of running out of gas. Having access to those other features will only enhance the playability of the build. Therefore, if you're comfortable with the data shown, you'll be happy with the build in general and can customize it to your preferences.
We are not looking at Action Surge, Umbral Sight, Dread Ambusher, Battlemaster maneuvers, spells,
Because you are not including things like this in the comparisons your conclusions will be skewed. These are principal functionalities in the classes you describe and directly affect what you are intending to evaluate.
I think that the point is to show that the build remains competitive with EB with AB, hex and a predetermined charisma level at each level without having to resort to using those options, the significance of which is sustained DPR that assures viability without concern of running out of gas. Having access to those other features will only enhance the playability of the build. Therefore, if you're comfortable with the data shown, you'll be happy with the build in general and can customize it to your preferences.
Yes, exactly! Thank you for putting it much better than I did =)
I have tried and tested several ways to make TWF effective.
My conclusion is that TWF is above the curve from levels 1 to 3. Once superior feats like PAM, GWM, CBE and SS start appearing, TWF become really underwhelming. To avoid bonus action clog, I believe Battlemaster has the most fit for TWF.
I played a build that I called “Failed Monk: A Nimble Brawler”. Which basically consists of one single dip in Monk and all the rest in Fighter Battlemaster alongside Unarmed fighting style. You get the same bonus action extra attack, but already kicking with a d8. If you manage to get WIS 16, you’ll have better AC than TWF warriors as well, and since Resilient WIS is a staple for Fighters, it’s a great synergy. Trip Attack, Menacing Attack and Distracting Attack are great maneuvers, and you can make better use of Parry with a maximized DEX. Eldritch Claw Tattoo at higher levels to surpass magical resistance and a nice +1 to unarmed attacks. Once you max DEX and get Resilient WIS, you are free to get top-tier feats like Alert or Lucky, instead of the subpar Dual Wielder.
And the backstory was super funny: a temple student who lacks the discipline to evolve as full monk, incapable of finding his inner strength and manifest the Ki, he runs away from the monastery with just the basics of martial arts and starts developing his own fighting style based on smart moves, clever blows and cunning agility.
You get war magic, blade singer's extra attack, the fighting style, and most importantly shadow blade. Shadow blade can give you enough damage potential to keep up with some powerful builds.
Gloomstalker 5/Death cleric 15
This gives you an extra attack the first round, extra damage abilities from channel divinity and Dread Ambusher, access to Spirit Shroud (a way better alternative to Hunter's Mark), Divine strike, etc.
Reality is that yes you can sort of make TWF somewhat competitive above L5 it was purposefully nerfed in the transition from 3.5 to 5. In making it always a bonus action attack not part of the regular attack or a special extra attack you only got with the fighting style and then only providing dual wielding as a follow up feat they made a conscious decision to make it non competitive. We can argue all day about the relative merits of TWFing builds but sadly all are subpar to GWF-GWM-PAM/Archery-XBE-SS AND WHILE “competitive” with other builds it’s not really superior only slightly behind. It’s the track kid that is always coming in in 3rd place in his school - faster than all but the best but in the county meet he comes in 5th/6th cause other schools have more “competitive” folks at their 1 / 2 positions.BTDT
I have tried and tested several ways to make TWF effective.
My conclusion is that TWF is above the curve from levels 1 to 3. Once superior feats like PAM, GWM, CBE and SS start appearing, TWF become really underwhelming. To avoid bonus action clog, I believe Battlemaster has the most fit for TWF.
I'm of the opinion that having options that overlap (ie multiple bonus actions) isn't a bad thing, but I realize that some people much prefer to just have an optimal option.
Take the rogue/fighter combo for example. Second Wind is available to heal the character on a short rest to preserve hit dice; Cunning Action to allow you to dash, disengage, or hide; and Steady Aim if you're using Tasha's. Using TWF gives you another option. If playing a melee character is important to the character concept, using hide or Steady Aim to generate advantage loses some luster due to the conditions that are required to enable them (versus the ability to use them as a ranged rogue). As you progress in rogue an sneak attack becomes a bigger component of your damage, the bonus attack changes from being a straightforward damage option to being a quasi form of advantage to deliver sneak attack (albeit one that requires other conditions to be present to enable sneak attack). If you are among low level minions that don't threaten your HP pool too much, you can use the extra attacks to deal a little more damage in an effort to thin the ranks. This is much more valuable than gaining advantage if they also have smaller HP pools, and slightly more valuable if they have larger HP pools since you can use the extra attack to get extra rolls if you need to move and wouldn't be able to use hide to generate advantage.
If the enemies are further away, you can dash to make up for some of the range issues that melee characters have, and disengage can be used to retreat if the creature is larger. This is particularly true if sneak attack has been delivered already. This loses value on a swashbuckler (and TWF gains value) due to the free disengage against enemies that you've made an attack against, but still maintains value when your retreat might enable multiple OAs.
Finally, stay aim can be used in damage races where having 4 chances to land up to 2 crits (one from fighter extra attack and the other likely generating a sneak attack) is more valuable than 3 chances to up to 3 crits (regular attack, fighter extra attack, and TWF bonus action.) Having options to fit the exact scenario is something that I value because that plays into the type of strategy that intrigues me.
It's not for everyone as some people see all those options and develop a case of paralysis by analysis. In that case limiting the bonus action to one or two highly effective (and likely less situational) options will allow for the player to have more fun.
Reality is that yes you can sort of make TWF somewhat competitive above L5 it was purposefully nerfed in the transition from 3.5 to 5. In making it always a bonus action attack not part of the regular attack or a special extra attack you only got with the fighting style and then only providing dual wielding as a follow up feat they made a conscious decision to make it non competitive. We can argue all day about the relative merits of TWFing builds but sadly all are subpar to GWF-GWM-PAM/Archery-XBE-SS AND WHILE “competitive” with other builds it’s not really superior only slightly behind. It’s the track kid that is always coming in in 3rd place in his school - faster than all but the best but in the county meet he comes in 5th/6th cause other schools have more “competitive” folks at their 1 / 2 positions.BTDT
Which is a good point to make if your version of fun means you always need to be the top dog in damage. If your version is to remain competitive (likely third or fourth in the party, depending on composition, but not significantly far behind) getting the style points needed to feel like you're representing a particular trope, and sometimes just to change things up so that you don't feel like you're playing the same character with a slightly different supporting shell (ie the feat becomes the character and the class becomes the fluff or flavor), then TWF can be an option and the discussion here is how to mitigate the losses versus feats.
Reality is that yes you can sort of make TWF somewhat competitive above L5 it was purposefully nerfed in the transition from 3.5 to 5. In making it always a bonus action attack not part of the regular attack or a special extra attack you only got with the fighting style and then only providing dual wielding as a follow up feat they made a conscious decision to make it non competitive. We can argue all day about the relative merits of TWFing builds but sadly all are subpar to GWF-GWM-PAM/Archery-XBE-SS AND WHILE “competitive” with other builds it’s not really superior only slightly behind. It’s the track kid that is always coming in in 3rd place in his school - faster than all but the best but in the county meet he comes in 5th/6th cause other schools have more “competitive” folks at their 1 / 2 positions.BTDT
Which is a good point to make if your version of fun means you always need to be the top dog in damage. If your version is to remain competitive (likely third or fourth in the party, depending on composition, but not significantly far behind) getting the style points needed to feel like you're representing a particular trope, and sometimes just to change things up so that you don't feel like you're playing the same character with a slightly different supporting shell (ie the feat becomes the character and the class becomes the fluff or flavor), then TWF can be an option and the discussion here is how to mitigate the losses versus feats.
This build was indeed never meant to be the top dog in DPR, because TWF simply lacks the feat or class ability support for it. This build is my attempt to make a TWF character that does good enough damage at most points in the game, while also offering other things and getting out of the shadow of the PAM and GWM feats. Rangers and Rogues both potentially bring a lot of utility, for example, while the latter tend to synergize with Dexterity more than Strength and cannot use heavy weapons without losing Sneak Attack.
Understand, I loved TWF in 1-3.5e and still enjoy and use it occasionally but 5e clearly made a specific choice to nerf it and create other styles of fighting for both nova and dpr. Yes they left TWF competitive in the sense that every Olympic miler is competitive. But it is not the ability it once was. You have shown that there are MC builds that are better for it and it certainly still gets style points but as someone that was that 3rd place runner it get olds very quickly knowing that what your supposed to be good at you will never be the best at. This is why rangers now focus on controlling the battlefield much more than straight up combat at higher levels. Take a look at every build proposed - 5 levels in fighter/ranger to get the second attack then 15 levels in a non martial class ( yes I’m including rogues in that they are skill monkeys and sneaks not standup combat roles. Same for clerics they are combat capable but at least half their power comes from spells not straight up combat abilities) TWF in 3.5 works best when your character is not a frontline /tank role.
My favorite dual wielder is a character that has Two-Weapon Fighting Style and Dual Wielder feat, so single or multiclassed Fighter or Ranger.
Exceptionally melee rogue, which i usually like to use for higher Sneak Attack landing chance.
I also did a dual wielder Barbarian (STR) once, in a campaign wjere Polearm Master was banned.
Yeah, getting extra opportunities to land sneak attack is great and rogue can gets notable advantage from dual wielding.
I'm surprised that fighter and ranger are popular picks as dual wielder gains doesn't do so well with 5th level extra attack which doesn't double your bonus action second weapon attack.
Fighter works well with rogue especially if you get three levels to get battle master and the brace manoeuvre. Brace means that "When a creature you can see moves into the reach you have with the melee weapon you’re wielding, you can use your reaction to expend one superiority die and make one attack against the creature, using that weapon." Sneak attack works on a "once per turn" basis so, even if you used sneak attack on your turn, you can also use it on your opponent's turn when they move into your reach.
This is where two-weapon fighting may, again, become sub-optimal as brace can work particularly well in situations where other of your allies aren't in your opponent's melee attack range which could allow you to cunning action disengage (with bonus action) to allow you to use brace again if the opponent moves back into range.
I said "could" because, of course, sneak attack requires the presence within 5ft of an opponent of an ally. Starting with a feat like Magic Initiate could give you that ally in the form of a familiar which, if it's an owl, can also disengage.
Magic Initiate could be especially good for this as it can also give booming blade which, ironically, also doesn't work well with extra attack but for a different reason. It further fails RAW to work with two-weapon fighting which only works "when you take the attack action", not when you take the cast a spell action which acts as the basis for booming blade. So booming blade won't allow a second weapon attack with bonus action freeing that bonus action to be used with a cunning action disengage which sets up both a triggering of booming blade and, potentially, another use of brace.
Even with a rogue multiclass this still looks better than a comparable dual wielder build and, with the proficiencies of a fighter, you can add a shield on the arm not carrying your sneaky yet booming rapier.
I also did a dual wielder Barbarian (STR) once, in a campaign wjere Polearm Master was banned.
I'm looking at making a Path of the Zealot Dual Wielder right now -- more attacks per round equals a better chance of hitting at least once and getting the extra Divine Fury damage
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I also did a dual wielder Barbarian (STR) once, in a campaign were Polearm Master was banned.
I'm looking at making a Path of the Zealot Dual Wielder right now -- more attacks per round equals a better chance of hitting at least once and getting the extra Divine Fury damage
If polearm master was banned, fighter1/paladinx might also have some competitiveness with two-weapon fighting style and con save proficiency (to keep a bless spell going, if you have any spell slots left after rapidly using slots on smites).
I also did a dual wielder Barbarian (STR) once, in a campaign were Polearm Master was banned.
I'm looking at making a Path of the Zealot Dual Wielder right now -- more attacks per round equals a better chance of hitting at least once and getting the extra Divine Fury damage
If polearm master was banned, fighter1/paladinx might also have some competitiveness with two-weapon fighting style and con save proficiency (to keep a bless spell going, if you have any spell slots left after rapidly using slots on smites).
Yeah, I'm actually not sure I'm going to go the full Dual Wielder route -- it's a whirling dervish sort of concept, so the other option is to stick to "normal" two-weapon style with scimitars and use the Mobile feat plus Fast Movement to zip around the battlefield slashing everything in sight but then moving out of range to avoid some of the downside of Reckless Attack
Dual Wielding long swords or battle axes though would be a potential (1d8+5) plus (1d8+5) plus (1d8+2) plus (1d6+3) a round at 6th level (assuming +3 STR mod and Raging) if every attacks hits for an average of 32, which certainly seems healthy enough
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I also did a dual wielder Barbarian (STR) once, in a campaign were Polearm Master was banned.
I'm looking at making a Path of the Zealot Dual Wielder right now -- more attacks per round equals a better chance of hitting at least once and getting the extra Divine Fury damage
If polearm master was banned, fighter1/paladinx might also have some competitiveness with two-weapon fighting style and con save proficiency (to keep a bless spell going, if you have any spell slots left after rapidly using slots on smites).
Yeah, I'm actually not sure I'm going to go the full Dual Wielder route -- it's a whirling dervish sort of concept, so the other option is to stick to "normal" two-weapon style with scimitars and use the Mobile feat plus Fast Movement to zip around the battlefield slashing everything in sight but then moving out of range to avoid some of the downside of Reckless Attack
Dual Wielding long swords or battle axes though would be a potential (1d8+5) plus (1d8+5) plus (1d8+2) plus (1d6+3) a round at 6th level (assuming +3 STR mod and Raging) if every attacks hits for an average of 32, which certainly seems healthy enough
I played a Zealot barbarian that switched between a greataxe and Hew who also had GWM. Even during the times when I was using Hew instead of the greataxe (and therefore unable to use the power attack), I wasn't hurting for damage and didn't have a use for my bonus action outside of Rage and the occasional attack provided by GWM from kills and crits. It would be a decent chassis for TWF, especially since rage damage applies to each attack. Having a dip for the fighting style will help a little and having a race like Half-Orc that has a payoff for more attacks would also be beneficial (in the case of Half-orc, more attacks means more crits, especially with Reckless Attacks in play. Granted, the extra Crit die isn't as impressive with d6s or d8s). The two level dip for Ranger would be nice for when you aren't raging, assuming you grab Hunter's Mark with it.
Zealot is definitely a good subclass for carnage and makes a decent tank to boot.
Some of the (reasonable) simplifying assumptions in this discussion ignore the potential effect of magic weapon rarity, which may be important in Tier 3+. In most campaigns, battle axes, long swords, short swords, and daggers will comprise a large portion of the magic weapons a party finds. A TWF build can use a magic short sword or dagger, potentially allowing for two different weapon effects on targets. With Dual Wielder, a TWF build could have two magic long swords or two magic battle axes.
With a pair of magic weapons in hand, a TWF build can offset more of the difference between GWM or PAM. Although GWM will often have a magic great sword or great axe eventually, magic pole arms aren’t that common in most campaigns’ random loot. Unless a PAM character has a friendly Artificer or gets a custom magic pole arm made, they might only get a magic weapon if the DM specifically gives it to them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Dual wielding is a staple of fantasy, but it is no secret that dual wielding is a bit on the weak side in Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition. It is not an awful playstyle in low lvl play, but it is inefficient compared to two-handed weapons from lvl 5 onwards in virtually all cases. Barbarians wielding two-handed weapons are also generally more efficient than dual wielders from lvl 2 onwards, due to Reckless Attack.
Dictionary
TWF - Two-weapon fighting / dual wielding
Dmg - damage
DPR - Damage per round
PAM - Polearm Master
GWM - Great Weapon Master
WotC - Wizards of the Coast
BA - Bonus Action
Lvl - Level
APR - Attacks Per Round / Multiattack / Extra Attack
ASI - Ability Score Increase / Feat
Goals
When building an effective TWF character, there are 4 main requirements to look for:
Why #3?
If a TWF build has roughly the same dmg as PAM would with the same basic build, wouldn’t that be good enough? Kinda, if you want it to. The problem is that PAM synergizes with a number of other feats, fighting styles and classes beyond what TWF can, greatly diversifying its options. PAM+Sentinel, for example, is a staple combination that deals both good dmg and can drastically impact combat via control.
In short, if you’re in a build where you can pick between TWF and PAM, not choosing PAM is a massive opportunity cost. What we are looking for isn’t just a decent building using TWF, but rather a build where TWF is an important part of it.
Possible classes
There are 4 classes that have some form of inherent access to, or benefit from, TWF, so let's take a look at those.
College of Swords Bards
If you want a good TWF character, a Swords Bard will go a long way, but it runs afoul of #2 on our list of goals. Swords Bards are spellswords who happen to use TWF, and their strength typically lies in their spellcasting more than their martial abilities. A Swords Bard will dual wield largely because it is the option they have freely available to them and investing in anything else is expensive for a class that wants to max out Charisma and pick up the Warcaster feat as soon as possible.
Highly recommended, but not the build we’re looking for.
Rogues
Most Rogues who go melee, with the exception of Arcane Tricksters and those with the Magic Initiate feat, will tend to use TWF. Like the Swords Bard, this is partially rooted in a lack of other options without a significant investment, but there are legitimate benefits to TWF for Rogues. They don’t get the TWF fighting style, but they benefit from having an additional chance to trigger their Sneak Attack ability. They are also incapable of using Sneak Attack with PAM or GWM.
That being said, Rogues do tend to scale a bit slowly on the damage front, especially after lvl the martial classes get Extra Attack at lvl 5.
Arcane Tricksters and Magic Initiate Rogues, however, rarely use TWF because they want to use Booming Blade and a Familiar for the help action (I recommend an owl familiar) and these builds are generally the strongest Rogues.
Fighters
Fighters, initially, seem to be good candidates for a TWF build and they will do a bit better than most. 4 APR, TWF style, and access to all weapons and armor. But TWF Fighters don’t only have a problem competing with PAM Fighters, but also any Fighter who picks up a decent two-handed weapon. A high DPR favors every fighting style more than TWF, since TWF benefits are nearly static.
Ranger
As the final option with access to TWF style, the Rangers have been associated with TWF since 2nd edition at the earliest and they were some of the strongest TWF characters in 3rd edition. Unfortunately, even the Ranger synergizes better with PAM than TWF because there is nothing in the Ranger class that does not work with heavy weapons.
The Solution
So what is the solution for making a good TWF build? It’s simple: Multiclassing. Specifically a Fighter/Rogue or Ranger/Rogue multiclass.
TWF is a decent option on its own at lvls 1-4 and doesn't fall behind until APR starts to go up. It’s once we hit lvl 5 that the problem of TWF dmg begins to show and we need something to boost it going forward. Even the Ranger’s spellcasting can only go so far to help. We do, however, still want to get the Extra Attack feature since it is a nice dmg boost for a TWF build as well.
The easy answer is this: Fighter or Ranger lvl 5 -> Rogue lvl 15
It isn’t overly important which archetypes you pick, but I would call out Gloom Stalker->Arcane Trickster and Battlemaster->Swashbuckler as particularly effective options.
Even just looking at the basics, without considering anything beyond TWF style, Extra Attack and Sneak Attack, it does pretty well compared to baseline (see section on basic damage calculations). This means that we have satisfied #1 on the list of goals; having a character that does pretty good damage at all points in the game.
We fulfill #2 on the list because this is a build that is primarily a dual wielder in combat, even though they will have many options for how to spend their BA should they not need that extra attack on that turn. This flexibility will benefit even a Ranger, since sometimes it is more important to reposition than attack to maximize DPR.
#3 on the list is a problem for a lot of builds, but not this one. Since we scale much of our damage with Sneak Attack, we don’t have to compete with PAM (or GWM) at all, since they aren’t compatible with Sneak Attack.
And, finally, #4: Seeing as we have Rogue as part of our multiclass, there is no denying that we will be able to contribute meaningfully outside of combat as well.
Bonus Build: Drizzt
Ever wanted to play Drizzt do’Urden, but been disappointed that dual wielding wasn’t all that badass in 5e? Here’s a simple build for the iconic Drow for 5e mechanics!
Last I looked, Drizzt was usually depicted as a lvl 16 character, so let’s go with that.
Race: Drow (+2 Dex, +1 Cha)
Background: Folk Hero / Outlander / Noble
Class: Ranger (Hunter) 5 -> Rogue (Swashbuckler) 11
Standard Array:
Str - 10
Dex - 17
Con - 14
Int - 12
Wis - 13
Cha - 9
Skills: Perception, Survival, Stealth + whatever else you want
Level progression:
Ranger: 1-5, Rogue 6-16
1: FE: Giants, NE: Mountain / Note: You should always adjust these to the campaign.
2: Two-weapon style. Spells: Zephyr Strike, Animal Friendship
3: Hunter: Colossus Slayer. Spells: Longstrider / Goodberry
4: +1 Dex, +1 Wis (18 and 14)
5: Spells: Pass Without Trace. Possibly swap one of your 1st lvl spells for another 2nd lvl spell. Summon Beast is an option as a variant on Guenhwyvar, even though the panther is technically from a Figurine of Wondrous Power.
6: Pick 1 skill from the Rogue list and pick 2 from all your skills (or your newly gained Thieves’ Tools proficiency) to get Expertise in. You should match these to your campaign.
8: Swashbuckler
9: +2 Dex (20)
11: 2 more choices for Expertise.
13: ASI: I would recommend building Constitution from here on out, since this is a melee build, unless there is a feat you really want first.
15: ASI
16:
Drizzt isn’t that much of a spellcaster, so I picked Ranger spells that are not very flashy, even though they can be really good. As far as I know, he is only ever shown using Drow Racial Magic, so spells that can be incorporated into being part of his skills as a swordsman (Zephyr Strike) or Ranger (everything else I suggested) work the best.
I chose Hunter with Colossus Slayer for its simplicity, but there are a myriad of options for other Ranger archetypes. Gloom Stalker is a fantastic option for powergaming. Swashbuckler should be obvious; it’s the swordmaster of the Rogues!
Why no Dual Wielder feat? 2 reasons: 1) I don’t think it offers enough value unless your DM is really obnoxious about following the RAW “draw 1 weapon” as part of your other action, and 2) scimitars are already light and finessable weapons.
Basic damage calculation vs Baseline
Baseline is defined as a Warlock using Eldritch Blast + Agonizing Blast + Hex and Charisma being 16 at lvl 2, 18 at lvl 4, and 20 at lvl 8.
Numbers shown with a base 65% chance to hit. Sneak Attack, added from lvl 6 onwards, has its own chance to hit since it can trigger on any of the 3 attacks the character has. With 3 chances to hit, a base 65% chance to hit gives Sneak Attack a 95,7125% chance to trigger (0,957125). Or, simplified, each 1d6 of Sneak Attack increases DPR by 3,3499375.
We are not looking at Action Surge, Umbral Sight, Dread Ambusher, Battlemaster maneuvers, spells, magic weapons or anything else that might increase TWF DPR. This is just comparing our build when it is just using TWF+Sneak Attack with stat neutral weapons to baseline. The actual damage potential of a TWF build will be higher than this. We are also not looking at crits, which also favors TWF through Sneak Attack.
Lvl 2:
TWF: 2d6 + 6 = 13 / 65% = 8,45
Baseline: 1d10 + 3 + 1d6 = 11 / 65% = 7,15
Lvl 5:
TWF: 3d6 + 12 = 22,5 / % = 14,625
Baseline: 2d10 + 8 + 2d6 = 26 / 65% = 16,9
Lvl 6:
TWF: +3,3499375 = 17,9749375
Lvl 8:
TWF: +3,3499375 = 21,324875
Lvl 10:
TWF: +3,3499375 = 24,6748125
Lvl 11:
TWF: 3d6 + 15 + 3d6 = 36 / % = 24,6748125
Baseline: 3d10 + 15 + 3d6 = 42 / 65% = 27,3
Lvl 12:
TWF: +3,3499375 = 28,02475
Lvl 14:
TWF: +3,3499375 = 31,3746875
Lvl 16:
TWF: +3,3499375 = 34,724625
17:
TWF: 3d6 + 15 + 6d6 = 46,5 / % = 34,724625
Baseline: 4d10 + 20 + 4d6 = 56 / 65% = 36,4
18:
TWF: +3,3499375 = 38,0745625
20:
TWF: +3,3499375 = 41,4245
Because you are not including things like this in the comparisons your conclusions will be skewed. These are principal functionalities in the classes you describe and directly affect what you are intending to evaluate.
I think my point comes across fairly straightforwardly; here is the minimum DPR you can expect regardless of how you build this character, which compared favorably to baseline at most levels. I explicitly state the actual damage will likely be higher.
I think that the point is to show that the build remains competitive with EB with AB, hex and a predetermined charisma level at each level without having to resort to using those options, the significance of which is sustained DPR that assures viability without concern of running out of gas. Having access to those other features will only enhance the playability of the build. Therefore, if you're comfortable with the data shown, you'll be happy with the build in general and can customize it to your preferences.
Yes, exactly! Thank you for putting it much better than I did =)
I have tried and tested several ways to make TWF effective.
My conclusion is that TWF is above the curve from levels 1 to 3. Once superior feats like PAM, GWM, CBE and SS start appearing, TWF become really underwhelming. To avoid bonus action clog, I believe Battlemaster has the most fit for TWF.
I played a build that I called “Failed Monk: A Nimble Brawler”. Which basically consists of one single dip in Monk and all the rest in Fighter Battlemaster alongside Unarmed fighting style. You get the same bonus action extra attack, but already kicking with a d8. If you manage to get WIS 16, you’ll have better AC than TWF warriors as well, and since Resilient WIS is a staple for Fighters, it’s a great synergy. Trip Attack, Menacing Attack and Distracting Attack are great maneuvers, and you can make better use of Parry with a maximized DEX. Eldritch Claw Tattoo at higher levels to surpass magical resistance and a nice +1 to unarmed attacks. Once you max DEX and get Resilient WIS, you are free to get top-tier feats like Alert or Lucky, instead of the subpar Dual Wielder.
And the backstory was super funny: a temple student who lacks the discipline to evolve as full monk, incapable of finding his inner strength and manifest the Ki, he runs away from the monastery with just the basics of martial arts and starts developing his own fighting style based on smart moves, clever blows and cunning agility.
There are 2 builds I would propose for best TWF:
Eldritch Knight 11/Bladesinger 9
You get war magic, blade singer's extra attack, the fighting style, and most importantly shadow blade. Shadow blade can give you enough damage potential to keep up with some powerful builds.
Gloomstalker 5/Death cleric 15
This gives you an extra attack the first round, extra damage abilities from channel divinity and Dread Ambusher, access to Spirit Shroud (a way better alternative to Hunter's Mark), Divine strike, etc.
Reality is that yes you can sort of make TWF somewhat competitive above L5 it was purposefully nerfed in the transition from 3.5 to 5. In making it always a bonus action attack not part of the regular attack or a special extra attack you only got with the fighting style and then only providing dual wielding as a follow up feat they made a conscious decision to make it non competitive. We can argue all day about the relative merits of TWFing builds but sadly all are subpar to GWF-GWM-PAM/Archery-XBE-SS AND WHILE “competitive” with other builds it’s not really superior only slightly behind. It’s the track kid that is always coming in in 3rd place in his school - faster than all but the best but in the county meet he comes in 5th/6th cause other schools have more “competitive” folks at their 1 / 2 positions.BTDT
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
I'm of the opinion that having options that overlap (ie multiple bonus actions) isn't a bad thing, but I realize that some people much prefer to just have an optimal option.
Take the rogue/fighter combo for example. Second Wind is available to heal the character on a short rest to preserve hit dice; Cunning Action to allow you to dash, disengage, or hide; and Steady Aim if you're using Tasha's. Using TWF gives you another option. If playing a melee character is important to the character concept, using hide or Steady Aim to generate advantage loses some luster due to the conditions that are required to enable them (versus the ability to use them as a ranged rogue). As you progress in rogue an sneak attack becomes a bigger component of your damage, the bonus attack changes from being a straightforward damage option to being a quasi form of advantage to deliver sneak attack (albeit one that requires other conditions to be present to enable sneak attack). If you are among low level minions that don't threaten your HP pool too much, you can use the extra attacks to deal a little more damage in an effort to thin the ranks. This is much more valuable than gaining advantage if they also have smaller HP pools, and slightly more valuable if they have larger HP pools since you can use the extra attack to get extra rolls if you need to move and wouldn't be able to use hide to generate advantage.
If the enemies are further away, you can dash to make up for some of the range issues that melee characters have, and disengage can be used to retreat if the creature is larger. This is particularly true if sneak attack has been delivered already. This loses value on a swashbuckler (and TWF gains value) due to the free disengage against enemies that you've made an attack against, but still maintains value when your retreat might enable multiple OAs.
Finally, stay aim can be used in damage races where having 4 chances to land up to 2 crits (one from fighter extra attack and the other likely generating a sneak attack) is more valuable than 3 chances to up to 3 crits (regular attack, fighter extra attack, and TWF bonus action.) Having options to fit the exact scenario is something that I value because that plays into the type of strategy that intrigues me.
It's not for everyone as some people see all those options and develop a case of paralysis by analysis. In that case limiting the bonus action to one or two highly effective (and likely less situational) options will allow for the player to have more fun.
Which is a good point to make if your version of fun means you always need to be the top dog in damage. If your version is to remain competitive (likely third or fourth in the party, depending on composition, but not significantly far behind) getting the style points needed to feel like you're representing a particular trope, and sometimes just to change things up so that you don't feel like you're playing the same character with a slightly different supporting shell (ie the feat becomes the character and the class becomes the fluff or flavor), then TWF can be an option and the discussion here is how to mitigate the losses versus feats.
This build was indeed never meant to be the top dog in DPR, because TWF simply lacks the feat or class ability support for it. This build is my attempt to make a TWF character that does good enough damage at most points in the game, while also offering other things and getting out of the shadow of the PAM and GWM feats. Rangers and Rogues both potentially bring a lot of utility, for example, while the latter tend to synergize with Dexterity more than Strength and cannot use heavy weapons without losing Sneak Attack.
Understand, I loved TWF in 1-3.5e and still enjoy and use it occasionally but 5e clearly made a specific choice to nerf it and create other styles of fighting for both nova and dpr. Yes they left TWF competitive in the sense that every Olympic miler is competitive. But it is not the ability it once was. You have shown that there are MC builds that are better for it and it certainly still gets style points but as someone that was that 3rd place runner it get olds very quickly knowing that what your supposed to be good at you will never be the best at. This is why rangers now focus on controlling the battlefield much more than straight up combat at higher levels. Take a look at every build proposed - 5 levels in fighter/ranger to get the second attack then 15 levels in a non martial class ( yes I’m including rogues in that they are skill monkeys and sneaks not standup combat roles. Same for clerics they are combat capable but at least half their power comes from spells not straight up combat abilities) TWF in 3.5 works best when your character is not a frontline /tank role.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
My favorite dual wielder is a character that has Two-Weapon Fighting Style and Dual Wielder feat, so single or multiclassed Fighter or Ranger.
Exceptionally melee rogue, which i usually like to use for higher Sneak Attack landing chance.
I also did a dual wielder Barbarian (STR) once, in a campaign wjere Polearm Master was banned.
Yeah, getting extra opportunities to land sneak attack is great and rogue can gets notable advantage from dual wielding.
I'm surprised that fighter and ranger are popular picks as dual wielder gains doesn't do so well with 5th level extra attack which doesn't double your bonus action second weapon attack.
Fighter works well with rogue especially if you get three levels to get battle master and the brace manoeuvre. Brace means that "When a creature you can see moves into the reach you have with the melee weapon you’re wielding, you can use your reaction to expend one superiority die and make one attack against the creature, using that weapon." Sneak attack works on a "once per turn" basis so, even if you used sneak attack on your turn, you can also use it on your opponent's turn when they move into your reach.
This is where two-weapon fighting may, again, become sub-optimal as brace can work particularly well in situations where other of your allies aren't in your opponent's melee attack range which could allow you to cunning action disengage (with bonus action) to allow you to use brace again if the opponent moves back into range.
I said "could" because, of course, sneak attack requires the presence within 5ft of an opponent of an ally. Starting with a feat like Magic Initiate could give you that ally in the form of a familiar which, if it's an owl, can also disengage.
Magic Initiate could be especially good for this as it can also give booming blade which, ironically, also doesn't work well with extra attack but for a different reason. It further fails RAW to work with two-weapon fighting which only works "when you take the attack action", not when you take the cast a spell action which acts as the basis for booming blade. So booming blade won't allow a second weapon attack with bonus action freeing that bonus action to be used with a cunning action disengage which sets up both a triggering of booming blade and, potentially, another use of brace.
Even with a rogue multiclass this still looks better than a comparable dual wielder build and, with the proficiencies of a fighter, you can add a shield on the arm not carrying your sneaky yet booming rapier.
I'm looking at making a Path of the Zealot Dual Wielder right now -- more attacks per round equals a better chance of hitting at least once and getting the extra Divine Fury damage
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
If polearm master was banned, fighter1/paladinx might also have some competitiveness with two-weapon fighting style and con save proficiency (to keep a bless spell going, if you have any spell slots left after rapidly using slots on smites).
Yeah, I'm actually not sure I'm going to go the full Dual Wielder route -- it's a whirling dervish sort of concept, so the other option is to stick to "normal" two-weapon style with scimitars and use the Mobile feat plus Fast Movement to zip around the battlefield slashing everything in sight but then moving out of range to avoid some of the downside of Reckless Attack
Dual Wielding long swords or battle axes though would be a potential (1d8+5) plus (1d8+5) plus (1d8+2) plus (1d6+3) a round at 6th level (assuming +3 STR mod and Raging) if every attacks hits for an average of 32, which certainly seems healthy enough
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
It is always better to increase your main attacking stat, specially DEX, than get Dual Wielder.
I played a Zealot barbarian that switched between a greataxe and Hew who also had GWM. Even during the times when I was using Hew instead of the greataxe (and therefore unable to use the power attack), I wasn't hurting for damage and didn't have a use for my bonus action outside of Rage and the occasional attack provided by GWM from kills and crits. It would be a decent chassis for TWF, especially since rage damage applies to each attack. Having a dip for the fighting style will help a little and having a race like Half-Orc that has a payoff for more attacks would also be beneficial (in the case of Half-orc, more attacks means more crits, especially with Reckless Attacks in play. Granted, the extra Crit die isn't as impressive with d6s or d8s). The two level dip for Ranger would be nice for when you aren't raging, assuming you grab Hunter's Mark with it.
Zealot is definitely a good subclass for carnage and makes a decent tank to boot.
Some of the (reasonable) simplifying assumptions in this discussion ignore the potential effect of magic weapon rarity, which may be important in Tier 3+. In most campaigns, battle axes, long swords, short swords, and daggers will comprise a large portion of the magic weapons a party finds. A TWF build can use a magic short sword or dagger, potentially allowing for two different weapon effects on targets. With Dual Wielder, a TWF build could have two magic long swords or two magic battle axes.
With a pair of magic weapons in hand, a TWF build can offset more of the difference between GWM or PAM. Although GWM will often have a magic great sword or great axe eventually, magic pole arms aren’t that common in most campaigns’ random loot. Unless a PAM character has a friendly Artificer or gets a custom magic pole arm made, they might only get a magic weapon if the DM specifically gives it to them.